Howe v. Smith
452 U.S. 473 · Decided June 17, 1981 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Howe v. Smith was decided on June 17, 1981 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, prisoners' and defendants' rights” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 452 U.S. 473 · 101 S. Ct. 2468 · 69 L. Ed. 2d 171 · 1981 U.S. LEXIS 31
- Docket number
- 80-5392
- Decided
- June 17, 1981
- Argued
- April 28, 1981
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Warren E. Burger
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, prisoners' and defendants' rights
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- 18 U.S.C. § 5003
- Type of law
- Infrequently litigated statute
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Howe v. Smith, Attorney General, et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1980-122, docket 1980-122-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, prisoners' and defendants' rights”
- Connecticut Board of Pardons v. Dumschat
- Jago v. Van Curen
- Vitek v. JonesLaw held unconstitutional
- Hewitt v. Helms
- Olim v. Wakinekona
- City of Revere v. Massachusetts General Hospital
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. BeckwithLaw held unconstitutional
- Allstate Insurance Co. v. Hague
- San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. City of San Diego
- Connecticut Board of Pardons v. Dumschat
- Dames & Moore v. Regan
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error