force by police officers that was in effect at the time of the incident made the basis of the plaintiffs complaint in a case in which the defendant ple n. 7 (5th Cir.1995): The question “ 'is not whether the law was settled, viewed abstractly, but whether, measured by an objective standard, a. reasonable officer would know that his action was illegal.' ” 127 . See Brady v. Fort Bend County, 58 F.3d 173, 175-76 (5th Cir.1995); and Boddie v. City of Columbus, Mississippi, 989 F.2d 745, 748 (5th Cir.1993). 128 . Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 229, 112 S.Ct. 534, 537, 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991); Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 343, 106 S.Ct. 1092, 1097, 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986); Pierce v. Smith, 117 F.3d at 871; Baker v. Putnal, 75 F.3d at 198; and Brady v. Fort Bend County, 58 F. h Cir.1985), (<HOLDING>); and Green v. Ferrell, 801 F.2d 765, 772 (5th
holding that access to a weekly bookmobile coupled with circumscribed assistance from law students was insufficient to afford meaningful access to the courts holding that reasonable access includes general facility access without notice and patient access with twentyfour hour notice holding that the total denial of all access to the law library for seven months violated the plaintiffs constitutional right of access to the courts holding that denial of access to carbon paper and reproduction equipment and denial of facetoface access to other inmates did not deprive an inmate of his right of access to the courts holding that prisoners have a constitutional right to meaningful access to courts and examining the facility as a whole to determine whether such access was sufficient