© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill CHAPTERCHAPTER ELEVENELEVEN

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill THE LEGAL WORLD: Prisoners’ Rights Photo © Corbis, used with permission.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS HANDS-OFF DOCTRINE: An historical policy of American courts not to intervene in prison management. Courts tended to follow the doctrine until the late 1960s. PRISONERS’ RIGHTS: Constitutional guarantees of free speech, religious practice, due process, and other private and personal rights as well as constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishments made applicable to prison inmates by the federal courts.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill LEGAL FOUNDATIONS Prisoners’ rights derive from: The U. S. Constitution — The supreme law of our land. Federal Statutes — Laws passed by Congress. State Constitutions — The dominant law within each state. State Statutes — May grant rights not conferred by the state constitution.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONDEFINITION INSTITUTIONAL NEEDS: Prison administration interests recognized by the courts as justifying some restrictions on the constitutional rights of prisoners. Those interests are maintenance of institutional order, maintenance of institutional security, safety of prison inmates and staff, and rehabilitation of inmates. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS: An order that directs the person detaining a prisoner to bring him or her before a judge, who will determine the lawfulness of the imprisonment. INJUNCTION: A judicial order to do or refrain from doing a particular act.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill JURISDICTION: The power, right, or authority of a court to interpret and apply the law. TORT: A civil wrong, a wrongful act, or a wrongful breach of duty, other than a breach of contract, whether intentional or accidental, from which injury to another occurs. DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONDEFINITION CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS: The personal and due process rights guaranteed to individuals by the U.S. Constitution and its amendments, especially the first ten amendments, known as the Bill of Rights. Constitutional rights are the basis of most inmate rights. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS NOMINAL DAMAGES: Small amounts of money a court may award when inmates have sustained no actual damages, but there is clear evidence that their rights have been violated. CIVIL LIABILITY: A legal obligation to another person to do, pay, or make good something.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill COMPENSATORY DAMAGES: Money a court may award as payment for actual losses suffered by a plaintiff, including out- of-pocket expenses incurred in filing the suit, other forms of monetary or material loss, pain, suffering, and mental anguish. PUNITIVE DAMAGES: Money a court may award to punish a wrongdoer when a wrongful act was intentional and malicious or was done with reckless disregard for the right of the victim. DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill SECURING PRISONERS’ RIGHTS Prisoners may seek relief through:  A state-level habeas corpus action.  After state remedies have been exhausted, a federal-level habeas corpus action.  A state tort lawsuit.  A federal civil rights lawsuit.  A petition for injuctive relief.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill INMATE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES Grievance procedures are formal institutional processes for hearing inmate complaints. Following the deadly riot in New York’s Attica Prison in 1977, the U.S. Comptroller General encouraged the creation of grievance mechanisms. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill INMATE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES The U.S. Supreme Court made formal procedures mandatory in Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners’ Labor Union (1977). These procedures, which employ internal hearing boards, are used by inmates to enforce the protections afforded them by law.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill INMATE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES Grievance mechanisms seek to: Promote justice and fairness. Provide inmates a means to voice their concerns. Assist in identifying institutional problems. Reduce the number of lawsuits filed by inmates. Reduce violence.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill PRECEDENT: A previous judicial decision that judges should consider in deciding future cases. LEGITIMATE PENOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES: The realistic concerns that correctional officers and administrators have for the integrity and security of the correctional institution and the safety of staff and inmates. BALANCING TEST: A method the U.S. Supreme Court uses to decide prisoners’ rights cases, weighing the rights claimed by inmates against the legitimate needs of prisons. DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FIRST AMENDMENT Pell v. Pecunier (1974) articulated the concept of legitimate penological objectives and established a balancing test to weigh the rights claimed by inmates against the legitimate needs of prisons.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FIRST AMENDMENT Pell stated, in part: “A prison inmate retains those first amendment rights that are not inconsistent with his status as a prisoner or with the legitimate penological objectives of the corrections system.” © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FOURTH AMENDMENT United States v. Hitchcock (1972): An inmate can have no reasonable expectation of privacy in his prison cell, since official surveillance is necessary to meet legitimate security needs of the prison. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONDEFINITION CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT: A penalty that is grossly disproportionate to the offense or that violates today’s broad and idealistic concepts of dignity, civilized standards, humanity, and decency (Estelle v. Gamble,1976, and Hutto v. Finney,1978). In the area of capital punishment, cruel and unusual punishments are those involving torture, a lingering death, or unnecessary pain.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS CONSENT DECREE: A written compact, sanctioned by a court, between parties in a civil case, specifying how disagreements between them are to be resolved. DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE: Intentional and willful indifference. Within the field of correctional practice, the term refers to calculated inattention to unconstitutional conditions of confinement.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill EIGHTH AMENDMENT In Estelle v. Gamble (1976), the U.S. Supreme Court held that prison officials have a duty to provide medical care to inmates, and may not lawfully demonstrate deliberate indifference to the prisoners’ medical needs.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill EIGHTH AMENDMENT In Pugh v. Locke (1976) and Battle v. Anderson (1977), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a totality of conditions standard must be used in evaluating whether prison conditions are cruel and unusual. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS DUE PROCESS: A right guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and generally understood, in legal contexts, to mean the expected course of legal proceedings according to the rules and forms established for the protection of persons’ rights.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT Without access to the courts, prisoners have no due process opportunities. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said: “… prison walls do not form a barrier separating prison inmates from the protections of the Constitution.” (Turner v. Safley, 1977)

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT In Johnson v. Avery (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court held that inmates have a right to consult with “jailhouse lawyers” (other inmates knowledgeable in the law) when trained legal advisors are not available. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT In Wolff v. McDonnell (1974), the U.S. Supreme Court imposed minimal due process requirements on prison disciplinary proceedings that could lead to solitary confinement or reduction of good-time credits.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT The U.S. Supreme Court held that “the fundamental right of access to the courts” requires prison administrators to provide prisoners “adequate law libraries and adequate assistance from persons trained in the law” in Bounds v. Smith (1977). © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill END OF THE PRISONER RIGHTS ERA By the late 1980s, increasing costs to the states for defense against inmates’ frivolous lawsuits—those with no foundation in fact, generally brought for publicity, political, or other reasons not related to law—caused the federal court to take a new look at prisoners’ rights.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill END OF THE PRISONER RIGHTS ERA The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act of 1980 requires state inmates to exhaust all state remedies before filing a writ of habeas corpus in federal court, and federal inmate habeas corpus petitions must show the deprivation of a right to which they are entitled despite confinement.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill END OF THE PRISONER RIGHTS ERA The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 reduces federal court lawsuits by imposing restrictive filing rules and mandating penalties for malicious or frivolous suits. In Booth v. Churner et al (2001), the Court held that federal inmates must exhaust administrative options before seeking habeas corpus relief.

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill FEMALE INMATES and the COURTS While male inmates petitioned the courts for expansion of their rights, female inmates frequently had to resort to the courts simply to gain rights the male inmates already had. Most suits brought by female inmates sought equal treatment under the Constitution’s equal protection clause. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill

© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill