SUPREME COURT has ruled against prison guard violence, but courts have generally refused to expand the rights of prison inmates.. First, an inmate necessarily gives up many rights and pr
Trang 1killings in the prison, the prisoners in Marion were placed on permanent lockdown, making the entire prison a solitary-confinement facility virtually overnight Marion has remained on lockdown ever since
By the 1980s most prison administrators abandoned rehabilitation as a goal Forced by an increasing problem with overcrowding and the resulting increase in violence, administrators returned to punishment and security as the primary purposes of prison Though most prisons continue to operate educational and other rehabilitative programs, the rights of prison inmates have been frozen at the minimal number recognized by courts in the 1960s and 1970s The U.S SUPREME COURT has ruled against prison
guard violence, but courts have generally refused
to expand the rights of prison inmates In most cases, courts have approved increased INFRINGE-MENTof inmates’ rights if prison officials declare that the restrictions are for security purposes
Prisoners’ Rights
Prisoners’ rights are limited For the most part, jail and prison inmates may demand only a
“minimal civilized measure of shelter” (Union County Jail Inmates v DiBuono, 713 F.2d 984 [3d Cir 1983]) Generally, courts follow three basic principles when deciding whether to recognize a particular right First, an inmate necessarily gives up many rights and privileges enjoyed by the rest of society; second, an inmate
Prison Life, New Hampshire State Prison
The New Hampshire Department of
Corrections oversees four prisons,
three halfway houses, and one Secure
Psychiatric Unit (in Concord) Prison
facilities include the New Hampshire
State Prison for Men in Concord, the
New Hampshire State Prison for Women
in Goffstown, the Lakes Region Facility
in Laconia, and the Northern New
Hampshire Correctional Facility in
Ber-lin The Lakes Region Facility is reserved
for first-time offenders convicted of
nonviolent crimes; the Northern New
Hampshire Correctional Facility houses
medium-security male inmates It costs
$19,888 per year to keep an inmate in
prison in New Hampshire
The men’s prison in Concord, New
Hampshire, is representative of the daily
life of the average prison inmate in the
United States Upon order of the court,
new prisoners are transported by sheriff
deputies to the appropriate prison
re-ceiving facility After arrival, the inmate
is photographed, fingerprinted, and
given prison clothing and toiletries
Prisoners must wear prison clothing
and an identification card at all times
All new inmates are placed in a locked
cell and are kept isolated from other
prisoners until approved by prison staff for proper housing assignment
During approximately 30 days in quarantine custody, called Reception and Diagnostic, inmates are interviewed and tested by a multidisciplinary team of prison staff Inmates receive an orienta-tion to prison rules and expectaorienta-tions, medical and dental exams, mental health assessment, religious and program orien-tation, and educational testing After the diagnostic period is over, the offender moves to a correctional housing unit with similarly classified inmates
Inmates are classified either C-5, C-4, C-3, C-2, or C-1 (C stands for “classifica-tion”) The C-5 classification is for danger-ous or problem inmates C-4 inmates are individuals who were C-5 but are working their way back to C-3 status, which is the general prison population New prisoners are designated C-3 unless they break rules while in Reception and Diagnostic, in which case they may be classified as C-4
or C-5
C-2 inmates are housed in a mini-mum security building just outside the prison walls; C-1, or work release, inmates are allowed to live in halfway houses Though they are supervised by
prison officials, they live outside the prison, preparing for reentry into the community
Daily life for a C-5 inmate is spartan The average C-5 inmate spends all but one hour in a cell located in the Security Housing Unit (SHU), a building sepa-rate from the rest of the prison popula-tion A C-5 inmate has no cellmate and receives his meals in his cell He may leave his cell for one hour of outdoor exercise a day in a cage outside the SHU Also, for a few minutes per day, a C-5 inmate may be allowed to make collect telephone calls from a room located in the SHU
Some C-5 inmates are allowed to work at sites located within the SHU; most of them make sheets, towels, or pockets for pants C-5 inmates with work privileges are allowed to communicate with one another while they work A C-5 inmate may keep reading materials He may also watch his own television, but only when he has been in SHU for more than 30 days Whenever a C-5 inmate leaves his cell, he is shackled by guards at the hands and feet and escorted until he reaches his destination
Trang 2does not relinquish all constitutional rights
upon placement in prison; and third, the
constitutional rights retained by the prison
inmate must be balanced against the security
concerns of the prison
The established rights of prison inmates
includeFREEDOM OF SPEECHand religion; freedom
from arbitrary punishment (e.g., restraints,
solitary confinement) on the sole basis of
beliefs, religion, or racial and ethnic origin;
freedom from constant physical restraints; a
small amount of space for physical movement;
essentials for personal hygiene and opportunity
to wash; clean bedding; adequate clothing;
adequate heating, cooling, ventilation, and light;
and adequate nutrition
Prisoners’ rights can be infringed for security purposes Prisoners have the right to freedom of speech, but prison officials may search their mail, deny a wide variety of reading materials, and edit the content of prison newspapers Prisoners have the right to ade-quate space, but they may be confined in isolation for long periods, even years Prisoners have the right to freedom from restraints, but their ankles and wrists may be shackled when they are moved They may also be temporarily strapped down or otherwise restrained if officials believe that they present a danger
Prison inmates often attempt to establish new rights in court Issues connected to prison overcrowding, medical treatment, media access,
A level of security more severe than
C-5 is called “isolation.” An inmate in
isolation may not leave his cell except for
one hour per day of outdoor exercise
inside a cage He may not watch
televi-sion or listen to the radio and has one
Bible for reading An inmate may be kept
in isolation for only a 15-day stretch, and
he must be held in another setting for at
least 24 hours before beginning another
15 days of isolation
Protective custody is a special
classi-fication that is similar to the C-5
Inmates in protective custody are
segre-gated from the general population: They
move about the prison in a group
separate from the other inmates
Protec-tive custody is reserved for those inmates
who have requested it and have a valid
fear for their safety
C-4 inmates are held in a Close
Custody Unit, which is also separate from
the general population C-4 inmates may
have a few more privileges than C-5
inmates, but they do not have the full
number of privileges enjoyed by the
general population They may work, they
are not shackled as they move outside
their cells, they may eat in the dining hall
with the general population, and they have
cellmates Also, the C-4 floor plan is
similar to that for C-3 inmates: each cell
opens into a common area where inmates
may talk and play cards or other games
However, unlike C-3 inmates, C-4
inmates may not lock themselves in their
cells for privacy, they may work for only a short period of time at a specific work site, and they generally have fewer privileges and are more strictly supervised than C-3 inmates
C-3 inmates comprise the general population They may move about the prison facility unencumbered by restraints They work at various jobs, some building high-quality furniture
Inmates can earn from $1.50 to more than $3.00 per day, depending on the job Those who perform highly skilled work, such as carpentry, may earn $3.50 per day Inmates do not receive cash for their work; their earnings are banked in
an account Using their account, they may buy articles from the canteen, such
as personal hygiene products, soda, candy, chips, and cigarettes Inmates may smoke cigarettes in the common area and in their cells However, if his cellmate objects, an inmate may not smoke in his cell
An inmate may receive money from persons outside the prison, but he may not receive packages of personal items
He may not spend more than $200 per month, no matter how much money he has He may buy items such as maga-zines, books, radios, and televisions, but only through the manufacturer
Inmates on C-3 status enjoy the full range of educational and work oppor-tunities available in the prison, and their
days are often consumed by these activities They may also use the law library for a certain amount of time each day
An inmate’s day begins at approxi-mately 7:00 a.m Those inmates sched-uled to begin work before 7:00 a.m are awakened earlier The lights are dimmed around 10:00 p.m and sometimes 11:00 p.m on weekend nights Except for C-5 inmates, restless inmates may leave their cells during the night to sit in the common area
C-3 inmates move from place to place at the top of the hour; they have 15 minutes to reach their next destination
If they are tardy for any destination, they will be reported as being out of place Being out of place in prison is a serious infraction If the disciplinary board finds that an inmate was out of place, the inmate may lose the privilege to watch television, listen to the radio, or talk on the telephone Repeated violations may result in transfer to C-5 status
FURTHER READINGS New Hampshire Department of Corrections Available online at www.state.nh.us/doc (accessed September 2, 2003).
Santos, Michael 2003 Profiles from Prison: Adjusting to Life Behind Bars Westport, Conn.: Praeger.
“Time in Prison.” 2001 State of New Hampshire Department of Corrections (January).
PRISON 99
Trang 3even exposure to secondhand cigarette smoke, are among those faced by courts
Another sensitive issue in prison is the use of prison guards of the opposite sex Women prisoners may receive more privacy in this regard than men prisoners For example, the U.S Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in 1985 that the practice of assigning female guards to conduct strip searches on nude men and watch them while showering, urinating, and defecat-ing did not violate any constitutional rights (Grummett v Rushen, 779 F.2d 491 [1985])
However, in 1993 the same court held that it wasCRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTto allow male guards to conduct searches on female prisoners while the female prisoners were clothed (Jordan
v Gardner, 986 F.2d 1521 [9th Cir 1993])
Prisoners retain some rights aside from those concerning living conditions Most prisons
“classify” prisoners and place them in various units according to the categories For example, violent criminals and persons suspected of gang affiliations are often housed in high-security areas
of prison, separate from the remaining prison population When an inmate is reclassified, he or she is entitled to notice of the reclassification and
a citation of reasons for the move
Congress and most states authorize the allowance of “good time” for prison inmates Good time is credit for time served on good behavior, and it is used to reduce sentence length For example, an inmate may receive one day of good time credit for every three days that he behaves well Other states withhold recognition
1971 Attica Prison Riot
T
B
he September 1971 revolt and riot by inmates at
the Attica State Correctional Facility in Attica,
New York, ended in a violent response by state
officials However, during the five days inmates
controlled the prison, lawyers for the inmates and
prison officials sought to negotiate a peaceful
solution
During the spring and summer of 1971, the
inmates at Attica had negotiated with prison
administrators over a list of prisoner complaints
Among the grievances were inhumane conditions,
abuse by prison guards, arbitrary release dates, a
lack of racial diversity among the prison guards,
and the prison’s failure to give inmates a
reason-able opportunity to exercise their freedom of
religion On September 9, 1971, the talks broke
down and dozens of inmates revolted Inmates
managed to overtake prison guards, take hostages,
and gain control of the prison facilities One prison
guard and two inmates were killed in the initial
uprising
Over the next three days the inmates met with a
host of attorneys, including civil rights and anti-war
advocate William M Kunstler The inmates
commu-nicated with state officials through the attorneys
and submitted a list of more than two-dozen
demands They also took steps to protect the
hostages from more hostile inmates by forming a human ring around the hostages
On September 13, 1971, the commissioner of corrections submitted a settlement ultimatum to the inmates and gave them one hour to respond If the inmates did not agree to the terms in one hour the state would use force to reclaim the prison
After two hours had passed with no response, Governor Nelson A Rockefeller ordered an assault
Officials shut off the electricity to the prison, state police dropped tear-gas canisters from helicopters, and state troopers emptied their rifles into inmates
in the prison yard The assault was brief but bloody:
39 inmates and hostages were killed A total of 43 deaths were ultimately attributed to the events from September 9 through 13 The state’s actions in retaking the prison were heavily criticized, leading
to a review commission report that called the use of force excessive
FURTHER READINGS Oswald, Russell G 1972 Attica —My Story Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday.
Wicker, Tom 1994 A Time to Die: The Attica Prison Revolt.
Lincoln: Univ of Nebraska Press.
CROSS REFERENCES Prisoners ’ Rights; Riot.
Trang 4of good behavior until theDEFENDANThas served a
certain portion of the minimum sentence
imposed by the court In New Hampshire, for
example, an inmate may be released for good
behavior after serving two-thirds of the
mini-mum sentence (N.H Rev Stat Ann § 651-A:12
[1983]) When an inmate has good time credits
taken away, she or he is entitled to notice, a
hearing before the prison board, and an
oppor-tunity to present evidence in his or her favor
Inmates may also gain early release from
prison through PAROLE, which is granted by the
parole board Prisoners have no right to parole,
and the matter of early release is left to the graces of
the parole board Once released on parole, a
parolee may be returned to prison for breaking
one of many conditions that are normally
imposed A parolee has no right to an attorney at
a parole-revocation hearing, nor does an inmate
have the right to an attorney at a parole hearing
Solitary confinement is used in many
prisons for violent inmates and those inmates
perceived as having gang-related affiliations
Some prisons are designed specifically for it
The original prisons, as envisioned by the
Quakers, called for solitary confinement, but
the practice was halted because of the
detri-mental effects it had on prisoners However, the
practice never completely ended In the 1980s,
solitary confinement became a regular feature of
prisons, and it has become the sole form of
incarceration in so-called Security Housing
Units or Supermax prisons
In a Supermax prison, the cells are
eight-by-ten feet and windowless The cells are grouped in
“pods.” The cell doors are perforated with holes
large enough for guards to see inside the cell, but
small enough to obstruct the prisoner’s vision
and light All a prisoner can see through the door
is another white wall Each cell is furnished with
a built-in bunk with a toilet-sink unit Nothing is
allowed on the walls Prisoners may be allowed
television, radio, and books, but these are taken
away as punishment for any rule infractions
Prisoners in solitary confinement are kept in
their cells, under surveillance, for 22.5 hours a
day Unlike the rest of the prison population,
inmates in solitary confinement may not take
advantage of educational or recreational
pro-grams The 90 minutes outside the cell may be
divided among visiting a small library, washing,
and exercising in a pen connected to the pod
Prisoners are strip-searched by the guards
before and after visiting any place and are
placed in waist restraints and handcuffs when being escorted
The assignment of a prisoner to solitary confinement is made by prison officials With regard to assigning supposed gang members to solitary confinement, it is the policy in some prisons to require that the perceived gang member “debrief” officials on his or her gang activity and renounce his or her gang affiliations before being released back into the general population
One of the most important rights possessed
by prison inmates is access to the courts through HABEAS CORPUS petitions After an inmate has exhausted all the motions and appeals available
to contest the conviction and prison sentence, a final round of limitedJUDICIAL REVIEWis provided through the writ of habeas corpus Through the ancient writ of habeas corpus, a court may order the release of a prisoner wrongly held
Habeas corpus petitions are granted only for certain constitutional violations in the pro-secution of a criminal defendant The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of
1996, 28 U.S.C.A § 2261 et seq., placed strict limits on this form of relief by directing federal judges to conduct habeas petition reviews according to this law Under the act, a federal judge may not grant habeas relief on any claim adjudicated on the merits in state court unless the ADJUDICATION resulted in a decision that was contrary to or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, as determined by the U.S Supreme Court Since a state court is unlikely to defy a general principle
of CONSTITUTIONAL LAW that the Supreme Court has clearly established, this review provides a few opportunities for a federal judge to examine and determine constitutional law
Relief may be granted if the state court’s judgment is based upon an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence An application of law to facts is unreasonable only when it can be said that reasonable jurists considering the question would be of one view that the state court’s ruling was incorrect If the prisoner fails to develop all the facts in state court supporting the claim, the prisoner will not be allowed to develop any new facts in federal court
Under the 1996 law, a federal court cannot award relief on the basis of any claim that was previously decided against the prisoner by a
PRISON 101
Trang 5state court This directive must be followed even though the federal court concludes that the state court decision was erroneous and that the prisoner’s federal constitutional rights have been violated
The enormous number of individuals housed in U.S prisons and jails has required state governments and the federal government
to spend growing sums of money A Pew Center
on the States study found that in 2008, one in
100 adults was in a U.S prison or jail With 2.3 million people incarcerated, the U.S leads the world in the number of people imprisoned
The states pay about $50 billion a year, and the federal government $5 billion, to house, feed, and provide medical care to inmates
Five states pay as much or more to maintain prisons as they do to fund higher education
Mandatory prison sentences for drug offenses and repeat offenders, along with sentencing guidelines, have contributed to the rise in prison populations
FURTHER READINGS Miller, Nan D 1995 “International Protection of Prisoners:
Is Solitary Confinement in the United States a Violation
of International Standards? ” California Western Inter-national Law Journal 26.
New Hampshire Department of Corrections 1994.
Biennial Report for the Biennium Ending June 30, 1994.
Palmer, John 2006 Constitutional Rights of Prisoners 8th ed.
New York: Anderson Pub Co.
Pew Center on the States 2008 One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008 Washington, D.C.
Tachiki, Scott N 1995 “Indeterminate Sentences in Super-max Prisons Based upon Alleged Gang Affiliations: A Reexamination of Procedural Protection and a Proposal for Greater Procedural Requirements ” California Law Review 83.
CROSS REFERENCES Corporal Punishment; Imprisonment; Incarceration;
Parole; Preventive Detention; Penitentiary; Prisoners ’ Rights; Probation; Sentencing.
PRISONER OF WAR SeeRULES OF WAR
PRISONERS’ RIGHTS The nature and extent of the privileges afforded to individuals kept in custody or confinement against their will because they have been convicted of performing an unlawful act
For most of U.S history, the treatment of prisoners was left entirely to the discretion of prison administrators In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the federal courts began to oversee state prison systems and develop a body of law concerning prisoners’ rights During the 1980s, however, a more conservative SUPREME COURT limited prisoners’ rights, and, in the 1990s, Congress enacted laws that severely restricted litigation and post-conviction appeals by prisoners
Two statutes enacted during the 104th Congress have had a significant effect on the federal court’s treatment of prisoners who seek
to bring claims against prison officials Congress passed the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA)
of 1995, Pub L 104-134, 110 Stat 1321, to place restrictions on the ability of federal courts when they consider claims by prisoners The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
of 1996, Pub L 104-132, 110 Stat 1214, reformed the system of HABEAS CORPUS review
in federal court Although prisoners continue to bring lawsuits in federal court, these statutes have made it more difficult for prisoners to make successful claims
Prisoners and Detainees
A prisoner is anyone who is deprived of personal liberty against his or her will following conviction of a crime Although not afforded all the privileges of a free citizen, a prisoner is assured certain minimal rights by the U.S Constitution and the moral standards of the community
Detainees are individuals who are kept in jail even though they have not yet been convicted of
a crime A majority of detainees are individuals who are unable to obtain sufficient funds to post bail and therefore cannot be released from jail pending a trial on the criminal charges
Historical Background
Until the 1960s, courts refused to set standards for the treatment of prisoners, claiming they lacked the authority and the expertise to do so Courts deferred to experienced prison admin-istrators to avoid interfering with their ability to respond to the varied, complex issues involved
in a penal system, such as custody, security, rehabilitation, discipline, punishment, and lim-ited resources
Trang 6By the late 1960s, however, prison
condi-tions in many states were clearly intolerable
Courts began to review the claims of prisoners
and to intervene regularly on their behalf
Finding that even prisoners are entitled to
minimum rights, federal courts in particular
exhibited renewed interest in the right of access
to the courts, freedom of expression and
religion, the constitutional prohibition against
CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, and the right to
DUE PROCESS OF LAW
Rights of Detainees
A great number of persons are jailed before
their trials These persons, known as “pretrial
detainees,” are ordinarily held because they are
unable to satisfy the financial requirements for a
BAIL BOND
Important law concerning the rights of
pretrial detainees emerged in the 1970s In Bell
v Wolfish, 441 U.S 520, 99 S Ct 1861, 60 L Ed
2d 447 (1979), the Supreme Court rejected the
theory that pretrial detainees cannot be deprived
of any right except the right to come and go as
they choose The Court criticized lower federal
courts that had given detailed orders to prison
administrators regarding how they should do
their jobs Although prisons cannot employ
methods designed only to punish detainees
before conviction, they can use suitable
proce-dures for purposes of security and discipline
Rights of Citizenship
Convicted offenders are deprived of many of
their CIVIL RIGHTS, both during and after their
period of INCARCERATION A majority of states
deprive citizens of the right to vote in all state
and federal elections upon conviction of a felony
Even in jurisdictions where offenders can vote
after release, they ordinarily cannot obtain an
absentee ballot and vote while in prison
Conviction and incarceration for serious
crimes can also lead to the total or partial loss of
the right to start a lawsuit not related to
imprisonment or to enter into a contract
Correction officials argue that permitting a
prisoner the right to carry on business as usual
creates an impossible security burden Most
states, however, permit a prisoner to be sued
The right of a prisoner to inherit property or
receive a pension can be affected by various
state laws Most of the legal disabilities to which
prisoners are subject are upheld because they do
not interfere with fundamentalHUMAN RIGHTS
Personal Property
Prisoners have certain rights regardingPERSONAL PROPERTY in their possession Court decisions have established the right of a prisoner to own some personal items, such as cigarettes, statio-nery, a watch, cosmetics, or snack foods In certain cases, prison officials have been found to
be justified in forbidding certain items because they fear that permitting inmates to accumulate some form of wealth encourages gambling, theft, and buying favors from guards Judges have sometimes refused to support prisoner demands for the right to own such items as radios, televisions, or personal typewriters
Privacy
Prisoners do not have the right to expect privacy
in a prison setting Court decisions have established that prison officials can properly monitor and record prisoners’ conversations, provided that the prisoner and the visitor are warned that this will be done Prison officials cannot intrude upon conversations that are legally afforded confidentiality, such as those between the prisoner and the prisoner’s attor-ney or spouse
In Hudson v Palmer, 468 U.S 517, 104 S Ct
3194, 82 L Ed 2d 393 (1984), the Supreme Court declared that prisoners do not have a FOURTH AMENDMENT right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures of their property because the Fourth Amendment is inapplicable to them
Throughout U.S history, prison officials have severely restricted the mail of prisoners For example, officials have opened incoming mail to catch plans and instruments of escape, weapons, PORNOGRAPHY, drugs, and otherCONTRABAND The threat of revoking mail privileges has also been used to enforce discipline Courts have man-dated, however, that prison officials offer good reasons for banning publications they consider inflammatory, obscene, or racist A vague allegation that a book or magazine is likely to stir up trouble has been held inadequate to justify broadCENSORSHIP
Prison administrators cannot unreasonably restrict or censor a prisoner’s outgoing mail In
1974, the Supreme Court, in Procunier v
Martinez, 416 U.S 396, 94 S Ct 1800, 40 L
Ed 2d 224, ruled that the California Depart-ment of Corrections could not censor the direct personal correspondence of prisoners unless such censorship were necessary to further
PRISONERS’ RIGHTS 103
Trang 7important interests of the government in security, order, and rehabilitation The Court also held that a procedure must be established
to determine that censorship, when appropriate,
is neither arbitrary nor unduly burdensome
Free Speech
Prisoners do not have aFIRST AMENDMENTright to speak freely Prison officials may discipline inmates who distribute circulars calling for a mass protest against mistreatment Adminis-trators have traditionally limited prison news-papers to issues that promote good morale
The restrictions against First Amendment rights of prisoners have extended to so-called inmate law clerks In many prisons, a certain inmate is often declared the inmate law clerk by prison authorities to consult fellow inmates about legal problems and to assist them with filling out paperwork The use of inmate clerks provides inmates with inexpensive and accessible counsel-ing However, prison authorities often maintain control over the clerks by preventing them from consulting with inmates without prior approval
An inmate in a Montana prison who had violated the rules restricting unauthorized communication with another inmate, in his role as inmate law clerk, brought suit claiming that the restriction violated his First Amend-ment rights Although the U.S Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declared that inmates have
a constitutional right to assist other inmates with their legal claims, the U.S Supreme Court disagreed In Shaw v Murphy, 532 U.S 223, 121
S Ct 1475, 149 L Ed 2d 420 (2001), the Court,
in an opinion by JusticeCLARENCE THOMAS, noted that a prior ruling on prisoner-to-prisoner communications required that restrictions must
be“reasonably related to legitimate and neutral government objectives.” Therefore, the sole question was whether legal correspondence merited a blanket exception to this rule
Thomas made comparisons to other First Amendment restrictions of prisoners, including prohibitions against giving media interviews, organizing private labor unions, and uncen-sored correspondence among inmates The restrictions on legal correspondence were no different, according to the Court, and were not entitled to First Amendment protection
Visitors
The law has long recognized the importance of VISITATION RIGHTS, because such rights aid the
prisoner’s eventual transition back into the community by keeping the individual in touch with society
Prisoners do not have a constitutional right
to enjoy contact visits, as opposed to arrange-ments in which prisoners are only permitted to talk to visitors over a telephone (Block v Rutherford, 468 U.S 576, 104 S Ct 3227, 82
L Ed 2d 438 [1984]) Courts have held that restrictions on visitation must be reasonable and related only to security needs and good order Prisoners do not have a right to engage in sexual relations with a visitor
The issue of the right of a prisoner to communicate and see visitors becomes more significant when the proposed visitor is a news reporter Federal courts have held that a genuine need for security must be given greater weight than access to the media Although inmates have a First Amendment right to communicate with the media, this right can be satisfied through the mail
Before an individual interview with a reporter
is approved, prison officials can require the prisoner or reporter to complete an application that discloses the names of the persons involved and the nature of the intended discussions Officials can also limit reporters to random interviews conducted during a tour of the prison,
as opposed to pre-arranged interviews with specific prisoners In addition, face-to-face inter-views can be banned for any prisoner who has been placed in maximum security
Access to the Courts
States cannot interfere with the right of a prisoner to petition a court for relief Neither a state nor a prison official can refuse, for any reason, to review a prisoner’s applications and submit them to federal court In addition, a state is not permitted to prohibit prisoners from having law books or legal papers in their cells on the basis that such materials tempt other prisoners to steal or create a fire hazard If a prisoner is indigent, the state cannot require him to pay even a small fee to file legal papers with the court However, a prisoner association cannot have filing fees waived The right to proceed as an indigent party is allowed only for individual prisoners
Prisoners have aFUNDAMENTAL RIGHTto legal counsel that requires special consideration Prison officials must allow reasonable times
Trang 8and places for prisoners to communicate
confidentially with their attorneys Prisoners
who cannot afford an attorney generally turn to
fellow inmates who are experienced in arguing
their own cases Assistance from these
“jail-house lawyers” was forbidden in most prisons
until 1969, when the Supreme Court, in Johnson
v Avery, 393 U.S 483, 89 S Ct 747, 21 L Ed
2d 718, held that prisons cannot completely
forbid inmate assistance unless there is an
alternative for prisoners
Prisoners must be provided with writing
materials and law books Additionally, prisoners
must be able to have their legal papers notarized
Work
Prisoners ordinarily receive token wages for
work performed in prison Courts have rejected
prisoner lawsuits demanding fair wages for
prisoner labor, concluding that prisoners do
not have to be paid at all Prisoners have no
right to their own labor, or the benefits of it,
while incarcerated
Prisoners cannot refuse to work or choose
the work they will do Prison officials can punish
prisoners for refusing to do work assigned to
them
Food
Every prisoner is entitled to food in amounts
adequate to sustain an average person Various
groups of prisoners have protested the failure of
prisons to furnish them with special diets, and
prisoners with special medical needs are
gener-ally accommodated Dietary accommodations
have been made for Orthodox Jews and for
Muslim prisoners, though prison officials may
balance the needs for prison security and
economy with the religious beliefs of the
inmates
Religion
Prisoners must be allowed to practice their
religion, obtain and keep written religious
materials, see or communicate with a religious
leader, and obey the rules of their religion that
do not endanger order and security in the
prison In addition, wherever possible, formal
religious observances for groups of inmates
must be allowed on a regular basis Prisoners
can have access to religious programs broadcast
on radio and television Different religions
within a particular prison must be given equal
treatment
Until 1997, when the U.S Supreme Court overturned portions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C.A § 2000bb-1 [1993]), prisoners who had been denied per-mission to exercise their religious beliefs sought
to obtain relief under this federal law Under the law, a restriction that imposed a substantial burden on religious exercise had to further a compellingSTATE INTERESTin the least restrictive way to be constitutional However, as of 2003, prisoners have not been successful in over-turning restrictions under this law because courts generally have agreed with prison officials that compelling state interests have been at stake
Medical Care
Prisoners are entitled to adequate medical treatment A prison official’s refusal to provide medical care to a seriously ill inmate violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment (Estelle v Gamble, 429 U.S 97, 97 S Ct 285, 50 L Ed 2d 251[1976])
In cases where the treatment is neither cruelly withheld nor intentionally mismanaged but is inept, prisoners can sue physicians in STATE COURTSforMEDICAL MALPRACTICE
Appearance
Prisons traditionally have strictly regulated the appearance of prisoners In situations where prisoners have complained that they were denied opportunities to shower or shave, courts have insisted on minimum standards of human
An inmate at San Quentin State Prison
is treated for a diabetic condition Prisoners have the right to receive adequate medical care while incarcerated.
AP IMAGES
PRISONERS’ RIGHTS 105
Trang 9decency and personal hygiene When necessary, courts have allowed prisons to force inmates
to keep themselves clean for purposes of maintaining the health of the general prison population
Discipline and Punishment
The rules regarding conduct must be clearly defined and explained to inmates, and each prisoner must be provided with a written list of the rules when entering a correctional facility
DISCIPLINARY RULES must relate to the needs of security, good order, and good housekeeping
A prisoner accused of breaking rules does not have all the rights of an accused at trial because a prison disciplinary proceeding is not the same as a criminal prosecution Inmates are not entitled to an attorney at disciplinary hearings, nor are they entitled to confront or cross-examine the witnesses against them
Prisoners must be given notice of the charges against them, the particular rules they are charged with violating, and the penalties for such infractions A hearing can be informal for small infractions The ordinary procedure is for the fact finder to write a statement that explains the evidence relied on and the reason for any disciplinary action taken The punishment must reasonably relate to the seriousness of the infraction
Prison personnel can use force in SELF -DEFENSE, stopping fights between inmates, com-pelling obedience to lawful orders where milder measures fail, and defending state property
Where guards use force without justification, a prisoner does not necessarily have the right to resist The use of tear gas and chemical mace is justified only when an immediate danger of riot
or serious disorder exists
Prison officials may punish prisoners by withdrawing certain privileges, such as seeing visitors, buying items from the commissary, or earning wages Prisoners cannot be denied fundamental human necessities
SEGREGATION is the most common type of punishment used in prisons for rule breaking
Prisoners can be categorized into groups and segregated from the general inmate population for a number of other reasons as well Each prison has its own system and titles for different degrees of segregation Separate areas may be set aside for young prisoners, repeat offenders, or prisoners who have been sentenced to death
Homosexuals and other prisoners who have been or may be subjected toSEXUAL ABUSEcan be segregated Segregation cannot be used, how-ever, to separate prisoners according to race
A number of prisons have more than one level of segregation, the most serious of which is solitary confinement Punitive isolation is not unconstitutional in and of itself Conditions in some prisons, however, have been found to be
so strict that they constitute cruel and unusual punishment A person in solitary confinement can be punished by the restriction of ordinary privileges, but a prisoner cannot be denied basic food, light, ventilation, or sanitation
Unconstitutional Prisons
Many federal courts have found that mere confinement in some prisons amounted to cruel and unusual punishment The intervention of federal courts in prison reform began in the early 1970s and continued into the 2000s In 1996, eight jurisdictions (Alaska, Mississippi, New Mexico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands) were under court order or a CONSENT DECREE to improve prison conditions At the same time, major prison facilities in 32 jurisdictions were under court supervision Typically, federal courts intervene when a facility has serious overcrowd-ing or does not meet minimum standards Federal court intervention has forced states
to improve prisons through the expenditure
of money for new facilities, more staff, and improvements at existing prisons However, many states have objected to what they perceive
as unwarranted federal interference Congress responded by passing the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) in 1995, which imposed substantive and procedural limitations on the ability of federal courts to issue injunctions mandating prison reform The act also restricted the courts’ ability to employ “special masters” to assist in prison-condition cases (ASPECIAL MASTER
is a person appointed by the district court to handle the day-to-day details and oversight of
a case.) The law has been challenged on many fronts by those seeking reforms in prison conditions
Lower federal courts have confronted issues posed by the PLRA by finding that the statute restricts their ability to establish minimum prison conditions In Inmates of Suffolk County Jail v Rouse, 129 F.3d 649 (1st Cir 1997), the
Trang 10U.S Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled
that the PLRA required a district court to vacate
a 1979 consent decree that set conditions for
confinement of pretrial detainees in Suffolk
County, Massachusetts In its decision, the
court rejected the inmates’ contention that the
PLRA was unconstitutional because it violated
the separation-of-powers principle and the Due
Process and EQUAL PROTECTION Clauses of the
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
The PLRA contains a section that entitles a
state or local government entity to the
immedi-ate termination of “any prospective relief”
previously ordered by a court Under the act,
prospective relief includes all relief other than
COMPENSATORY DAMAGES This definition meant
that provisions of the consent decree
concern-ing the housconcern-ing of prisoners could be
termi-nated The First Circuit found that the statute
was constitutional and held that it mandated the
termination of the consent decree unless the
district court were to make specific findings that
the decree had been narrowly drawn to correct a
violation of federal law
Remedies Available to Prisoners
Prisoners who seek to protect a constitutional or
civil right are entitled to complain, but they are
required to pursue whatever procedures exist
within the prison before taking their case to
court
The most popular vehicle for prisoner
lawsuits has been a federal civil rights statute,
42 U.S.C.A § 1983 (1871; recodified 1979) A
“section 1983 action” permits a prisoner to sue
in federal court for an alleged deprivation of a
federally protected or constitutional right by a
person acting under the authority of state law
A prisoner may sue the warden or supervisor, a
guard, or the local government that owns and
runs the prison
In the early 1980s as many as 15,000SECTION
1983 actions were filed each year, many of them
frivolous The U.S Supreme Court responded
by requiring many prisoners to use state tort
claims acts rather than the federal statute and
the federal courts The Court also established
difficult standards of proof for prisoners to
meet
In 1995 Congress sought to restrict prisoner
lawsuits by devoting numerous provisions of
the Prison Litigation Reform Act to this subject
The statute requires prisoners to exhaust
administrative remedies before bringing a lawsuit, expands the federal courts’ ability to dismiss lawsuits filed by prisoners, imposes numerous restrictions on the fees that can be awarded to a prisoner’s attorney, and forbids a prisoner from filing an action for mental or emotional injury without a prior showing of physical injury In addition, the act imposes restrictions on the ability of prisoners to proceed without paying filing fees Another provision requires courts to pre-screen lawsuits filed by prisoners and expands the grounds for dismissal of such suits Finally, the act grants federal courts the power to revoke the good-time credits of prisoners who file frivolous
or harassing lawsuits or present false testimony
or evidence to the court
The Supreme Court ruled on the PLRA’s requirement that the prisoner exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a federal lawsuit in Jones v Bock, U.S. , 127 S.Ct 910,
166 L.Ed.2d 798 (2007) Though the Court upheld the exhaustion requirement, it examined whether the burden is on the prisoner to plead and demonstrate exhaustion in the complaint,
or on theDEFENDANT to raise lack of exhaustion
as anAFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Court concluded that exhaustion should be an affirmative defense and that a lawsuit could go forward if the prisoner has failed to exhaust some, but not all,
of the claims asserted in the complaint A court should not dismiss an entire action if some claims do not meet the exhaustion requirement
The Court also ruled that states cannot enact laws that forbid prisoners to file § 1983 actions in state court In Haywood v Drown, U.S. , S
Ct , L.Ed.2d 2009 WL1443136 (2009), the Court asserted the Constitution’sSUPREMACY CLAUSE to strike down a New York statute that only barred prisoners from filing § 1983 actions
in state courts The state could not relieve congestion in its courts by declaring an entire category of federal claims to be frivolous
In Ali v Federal Bureaus of Prisons, U.S
, 128 S.Ct 831, L.Ed.2d (2008), the Supreme Court ruled that a prisoner could not use the FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT, 28 U.S.C.A
§ 1346, to recover the value of personal posses-sions that he claimed were taken when they were shipped to his new prison The federal prisons haveSOVEREIGN IMMUNITYin such cases
A prisoner’s ability to file a habeas corpus action in the federal courts challenging prison
PRISONERS’ RIGHTS 107