Journal 10-3
Download original document:
Document text
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
A PROJECT OF THE AMERICAN CIVil LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION, INC. VOl. 10, NO.3, SUMMER 1995 • ISSN 1076-769X Bronstein Leaves NPP But Not Human Rights Work Alvin] Bronstein announced last month that he would step down as executive director ofthe National Prison Project at the end ofthis year. Bronstein will continue as part-time special counsel to the ACLU. He will also be active as a board member ofthe London-based Penal Reform International, and will engage in speaking and consulting activities. We asked Ira Glasser, executive director ofthe AGLo, to write up some ofhis thoughts on Al Bronstein's careerfor theJOURNAL. BY IRA GLASSER n a humid spring evening this past June in Jackson, Mississippi, AI Bronstein sat by himself at the side of a large dining room at Tougaloo • College, an historical black college on the outskirts of town. His face was graced by a smile of deep contentment, mixed with intense pleasure and no little amount of pride. It is possible no one outside of his immediate family had ever before seen Bronstein look this way. He had ample reason. For most readers of this journal, AI is justly known as the legal architect of the prisoners' rights movement in America. Until the early 1960s, prisons were a lawless enclave, O Q) E >= -'" ~ ~ z. '" ...c I-~IL..- -,--~""""'~_ Alvin J. Bronstein, listening to a question from the group at the Lawyers Constitutional Defense Committee reunion in Jackson, Mississippi this June. beyond the reach of the Constitution, effectively immune from judicial review. The civil rights movement in the South became a model to challenge such enclaves, and by the late sixties, significant legal inroads had begun to be made. In 1972, the ACLU consolidated two of its local prisoners' rights projects in New York and Virginia and established the National Prison Project under Al's direction. It is no exaggeration to say that what Al achieved over the next two decades was nothing less than a legal revolution. He brought the rule of law into state prisons, filing lawsuits in nearly 50 states, challenging the entire state prison system in more go South to provide badly-needed legal assistance for embattled civil rights workers. In August 1964, somewhat apprehensively, Al enlisted with the Lawyers "You can't just walk away. You've raised expectations and you can't just dump it... ru go back. ru go back.·· And although he had three small children and couldn't afford to volunteer, he accepted a very small salary and went back. In 1%5. Al was named Chief Counsel of a new LCD<: office in Jackson, Mississippi. During his first two weeks there, he worked on 18 separate cases. Before he left three years later. he was physically beaten at least once and sued for slander for calling the notorious Deputy Sheriff Cecil Price a murderer (Price was responsible for the deaths ofJames Chaney, .\ndrew Goodman and ~1ickey Schwerner in 196-+). But he also argued nine civil rights cases before the Mississippi Supreme Court and won them all, a nearly unimaginable accomplishment at the time. More important. he was the staff sergeant for a small army of civil rights lawyers. who were there to get protesters out of jail. help people register to vote, eliminate the legal roadblocks placed in the way of the ci\il rights movement and in countless ways proVide legal resistance to Editor. Jon Elvin Mrs. Annie Devine, executive committee member of the Mississippi Freedom Democrotic Party and AI Bronstein in May 1967. The picture was taken after a meeting in Holmes County, Mississippi. than a dozen of them and monitoring the implementation of the Project's legal victories for years until the reforms were institutionalized. 1Wenty-three years after he began, it is fair to say that the Constitution applies to prisons, certainly in principle and often in fact. But it would be a mistake to see Al only in terms of his prison reform work. If the prisoners' rights movement was an outgrowth of the civil rights movement, it was no coincidence that its general was Al Bronstein. An ACLU cooperating lawyer in the late 1950s and early sixties, Al was also general counsel for Brooklyn CORE (Congress of Racial Equality), defending the First Amendment rights of protesters in New York in 1960 and of Freedom Riders in Mississippi in 1961. In early 1964, while setting up his own general practice in upstate New York, he saw a notice in the ACLU newsletter advertising for lawyers to 2 SUMMER 1995 Constitutional Defense Committee (LCDC), arriving in St. Augustine, Florida. During his first night there, he was welcomed by a Klan-style ritual: local antagonists of the civil rights movement driving by the LCDC office, guns firing. But there were other moments, too. Al recalls, obviously still moved by the memory now 30 years old, of a sweltering, 110degree night in St. Augustine, when he was reporting on LCDC's legal actions to his clients in the First Baptist Church: "Almost every one of them came up and shook my hand at the end of the meeting. The meeting ended singing 'We Shall Overcome': black and white together, holding hands swaying. It was one of the most beautiful, exciting, moving, emotional moments of my life." Later, in New York, when he thought LCDC might have to close down, he said to the ACLU Board: EcIitorial Asst.: Jenni Gainsborough Regular Contributors: John Boston, Russ Immarigeon Alvin J. Bronstein, Executive Director The National Prison Project of the American CIViII.iber1ies Union Foundation 1875 Connecticut Ave., NW, #410 Washington, DC 20009 (202) 234-4830 FAX (202) 234-4890 The Notional Prison Project is a tax-exempt foundationfunded project of the AClU Foundation which seeks to strengthen and protect the rights of adult and iuvenile offenders; to improve overall conditions in correctional facilities by using existing administrative, legislative and judicial channels; and ta develop alternatives to incarceration. The reprinting of JOURNAL material is encouraged with the stipulation that the Nononol Prison Project JOURNAL be credited with the reprint, and that a copy of the reprint be sent to the editor. The JOURNAL is scheduled for publication quarterly by the National Prison Proiect. Materials and suggestions are welcome. The NPP JOURNAL is available on 16mm microfilm, 35mm microfilm and 105mm microfiche from University Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Rd., Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346. THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL the harassment and intimidation that black people routinely faced in the lawless states of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana. On June 9-10 of this year, about 50 LCDC veterans gathered in Jackson, Mississippi, to remember that time and celebrate what they had accomplished. It was impossible to listen to them, lawyers, former clients, and activists, without realizing that for them all, Al Bronstein was the key figure. The affection, the gratitude, the respect was palpable. On the evening ofJune 10, the meeting concluded with a banquet, and the showing of slides Al took in 1964-65, including some that revealed a blackhaired, beardless, intense young man, at the center of it all. As the banquet was ending, and the last speakers were noting how revolutionary the changes had been, and how inalterably different a place Jackson was today, Al sat, smiling, almost beatific at the side of the room. The meeting ended, as it did that long-ago night in St. Augustine, with everyone THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL joining hands, black and white together, swaying to the words of "We Shall Overcome." Al knows, in his bones and by his experience, how endless the struggle is, how far we have yet to go, how rocky is the road ahead and how threatened many of our accomplishments are by the current political climate. But he also knows how astonishing the movement's accomplishments were and how victory was won, despite the overwhelming strength of the oppressors, by the cOllrage and persistence of the resistance. And so he smiled, as well he should. This country is a better and a more moral place because of Al Bronstein. He helped bring the rule of law and shine the light of liberty into some of the cruelest and most unjust corners of our land. He answered the call. He is a true American hero.• Ira Glasser is e.1:ecutive director ofthe American Civil Liberties Union. SUMMER 19953 u.s. Companies Expand Corrections Market to Overseas BY STEPHEN NATHAN .S.-owned private corrections companies are engaged in tough competition to develop their international operations. The strategy since the early 1980s has been to identify potential markets and form joint ventures with well-connected and experienced local . corporations to lobby governments and bid for contracts. The market leaders claim that outside of the U.S., their prime targets are the United Kingdom and Australia, but the scope appears to be even wider. Contracts are also being pursued in Canada, New Zealand and Panama. One industry analyst claims that Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) has identified markets in Canada, Brazil, Mexico and China "which in the long term could represent the majority of (CCA's) earnings."l By far the most aggressive-and successful-is CCA. Founded in 1983, by the mid 1980s it only had a handful of U.S. contracts and was unprofitable. But CCA had marketed both the concept and its own expertise enough to help set two European governments on the road to prison privatization and to form joint ventures in the U.K., France and Italy. In 1987 CCA formed a consortium (UK Detention Services Ltd, UKDS) with two established U.K. construction companies, Sir Robert McAlpine & Sons Ltd and John Mowlem & Co. Both companies were also regular contributors to the Conservative Party. UKDS' stated aims included lobbying the government; it has since publicly admitted to "a leading role in explaining the benefits of private sector management of prisons and the advantages of introducing competition to the Prison Service."2 CCA also acted as a consultant to Mowlem and McAlpine in the building of Wolds prison in northeast England. Wolds became the first privately managed prison in the U.K.. UKDS' first U.K. contract came in 1992, to run the 649-bed Blakenhurst prison at Redditch, in the west Midlands. However, early forays into other European countries were not so successful. In November and December 1986 U 4 SUMMER 1995 joint agreements with French construction firm Spie Batignolles, contract services giant Lyonnaise des Eaux and Banque Worms (the consortium known as COGESIP) were signed to bid for proposed tenders to finance, design, build and operate French penitentiaries. But a subsequent change in government led to a revised prisons privatization policy, with only non-custodial services in some 20 new prisons being contracted out. While CCA still has a French subsidiary, CCA France, company documents make no mention of any French contracts. In February 1988, CCA signed an agreement in Italy with Iniziative Industriali S.p.A., part of the SASEA Group. The first paragraph stated: "CCA has developed considerable expertise in the design, financing, building and management of private and public penitentiary facilities and systems in the United States...and wishes to expand its business in Italy."3 To date, the Italian government has not privatized any prisons. CCA's first overseas contract to get up and running was not in Europe but at IpSWich in Queensland, Australia. In 1989 CCA, along with two Australian partners, formed Corrections Corporation of Australia and won the contract to run Borallon Correctional Centre, which opened in 1990. Then in 1994 the government of Victoria awarded Corrections Corporation of Australia two contracts-a three year prisoner transportation and security contract and another to finance, design, build and run a new 125 bed women's prison, expected to open in June 1996. But CCA's global aspirations were greatly enhanced in June 1994 when it formed an international joint venture to bid for corrections contracts with Sodexho SA, a French management services corporation with FY 1993 revenues of $1.8 billion from operations in 46 countries. Sodexho also provides non-custodial services to five French prisons. The agreement gave Sodexho a 20 percent stake in CCA and the joint venture will bid for and (if successful) manage projects outside of the U.S., the U.K., Belgium and Australia splitting profits 51/49 percent in English speaking countries where CCA will take the lead and 49/51 percent in the rest of the world where Sodexho will lead. CCA's largest competitor both in the U.S. and abroad is Wackenhut Corrections Corporation (WCC) , a subsidiary of the long established multinational security firm with ex-FBI agents and military personnel on its board. WCC was formed in 1984 specifically to enter the corrections market. WCC's parent has security and investigative services operations in Canada, Central and South America, the Caribbean, Asia, Africa and Europe and thus is well placed to market its corrections expertise. It has set up two joint ventures in Australia. In June 1991 Australasian Correctional Services PTY Ltd (ACS) (now 66.7 percent owned by Wackenhut) was chosen by the New South Wales government to design, build and run Junee Correctional Centre for 600 prisoners. In 1992, the Queensland government chose Wackenhut's Australasian Correctional Management (ACM, now 100 percent owned) to run the high security Arthur Gorrie Remand and Reception Center near Brisbane. On 31 Mav 1995 the Victoria government chose ACS to build and run a 600-bed prison at Sale. In 1992 WCC formed Premier Prison Services Ltd., a joint venture with management services company Serco to bid for U.K. prison and court escort contracts. In 1993 it won a contract to run the nO-bed Doncaster prison in northern England. The third C.S. competitor abroad is Corrections Partners Inc (CPI) which is bidding for contracts in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the LX. Arecent advertisement for staff described its Australian company CorrPac Pty Ltd as haVing "long range economic objectives throughout Australia and the Pacific region."4 In the U.K. it has teamed up with construction firms Wimpey and AMEC but has no contracts as yet. What About Performance? The private sector claims it can do the job more cheaply, efficiently and creatively. In the U.K. and Australia these claims are yet to be independently substantiated. Both CCA and Wackenhut have experienced earlv difficulties. In Australia, the Arthur Gorrie facility run by Wackenhut's ACM has had a Continued on page 29 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL A PROJECT OF THE AMERICAN CIVil UBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION, INC. VOl. 10, NO.3, SUMMER 1995. ISSN 1076-769X Highlights of.Most Important Cases BY JOHN BOSTON DISCIPLINARY DUE PROCESS The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Sandin v. Conner, 1995 WL 360217 (June 19,1995), represents a significant step backward in the protection of prisoners from arbitrary punishment. The question is how long a step it is. The Court began by stating: "We granted certiorari to reexamine the circumstances under which state prison regulations afford inmates a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause." Id. at 2. By the end, it had purported to discard much of the "liberty interest" analysis that has governed due process jurisprudence since the late 1970s. Yet its rejection of the liberty interest theory is at least partly illusory, and the opinion leaves open many more questions than it resolves. The plaintiff in Sandin, a Hawaii prisoner, had been sentenced to 30 days in punitive segregation for "high misconduct" for using physical interference to impair a correctional function (Le., resisting a strip search). The Hawaii prison system ranks disciplinary violations in categories from "greatest misconduct" to "minor misconduct"; 30 days is the maximum punishment for the "high" category. After he had served his segregation time, the plaintiff's conviction was expunged. He then sued in federal court alleging that the refusal to permit him to call a witness had denied him due process. Prison officials argued in the Supreme Court that the prisoner was not protected by due process because placement in punitive segregation did not deprive him of liberty. The Supreme Court had previously stated in dictum that "solitary confinement" is a "major change in conditions of confinement" that should be governed by the same procedures as deprivation of statutory good time, THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEO JOURNAL Wolffv. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 571-72 n. 19 (1974), and the lower federal courts had almost universally adopted this view. The Supreme Court in Sandin rejected it. Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion began by reviewing the Court's prior prison due . process decisions. It noted that Wolffv. McDonnell held that state statutes governing good time credits that shortened a prisoner's sentence created a liberty interest, which it characterized as an interest of "real substance." Next, Meachum v. Pano, 427 U.S. 215 (1976), held that inter-prison transfers, even to higher-security prisons, were "within the normal limits or range of custody which the conviction has authorized the State to impose," and hence that such transfers did not constitute deprivations of liberty unless state law limited prison officials' discretion to transfer. /d. at 225. Subsequent decisions, Justice Rehnquist stated, "laid ever greater emphasis on this somewhat mechanical dichotomy" between the discretionary acts of prison officials and those that were governed by mandatory criteria. Sandin at 4. This methodology came to "full fruition" in Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460 (1983), which-in an opinion by Justice Rehnquist-held that state law might create liberty interests by the use of mandatory language and "substantive predicates" for official action. Hewitt led the courts farther away from the question whether the plaintiff had suffered a "grievous loss." Instead, they turned to the close analysis of regulations to determine whether their language was sufficiently mandatory to create a liberty interest. The results of the state-created liberty interest analysis have been undesirable, according to the Court-at least in the prison context. The Court acknowledged that the results of liberty interest analysis "may be entirely sensible in the ordinary task of construing a statute defining rights and remedies available to the general public." Sandin at 5. In prisons, however, it has created "disincentives for States to codify prison management procedures in the interest of uniform treatment," since such regulations may saddle the State with additional procedural requirements. It has also "led to the involvement of federal courts in the day-to-day management of prisons, often squandering judicial resources with little offsetting benefit to anyone." Sandin at 5. Justice Rehnquist cited cases in which prisoners asserted liberty interests in participation in "shock incarceration" programs, tray lunches rather than sack lunches, and cells with outlets for televisions. Therefore, Justice Rehnquist concluded, it is time to return to the principles of Wolff and Meachum. Acknowledging that states may create liberty interests protected by due process, these "will generally be limited to freedom from restraint which, while not exceeding the sentence in such an unexpected manner"as to give rise to protection by the Due Process Clause of its own force, ... nevertheless imposes atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life." Sandin at 6. (The Court summarily rejected the plaintiff's argument that the punitive character of a sanction invokes due process protections.) As Justice Breyer's dissent points out, the majority's approach results in a three-tiered due process analysis. There are deprivations that are "so severe in kind or degree (or so removed from the original terms of confinement) that they amount to deprivations of liberty," regardless of the terms of state law. At the other end of the spectrum are "minor matters." In between is "a broad middle category of imposed restraints or deprivations that, considered by themselves, are neither obviously so serious as to fall within, nor obviously so insignificant as to fall without, the Clause's protection." Sandin at 13-14. Under the new "atypical and significant hardship" standard, the Court held that the plaintiff had not been deprived of liberty. ... [Djisciplinary segregation, with inSignificant exceptions, mirrored those conditions imposed upon inmates in administrative segregation and protective custody.... Thus, Conner's confinement did not exceed similar, but totally discretionary confinement in either duration or degree ofrestriction. Indeed, the conditions at Halawa involve significant amounts of 'lockdown time' SUMMER 1995 5 even for inmates in the general population. Based on a comparison between inmates inside and outside disciplinary segregation, the State's actions in placing him there for 30 days did not work a major disruption in his environment. Sandin at 7. The Court also rejected the argument that the effect of discipline on parole opportunities brought it within the ambit of due process protections; since the parole board was not required by law to deny parole based on disciplinary record, and since Hawaii Ia,w provides a separate hearing in connection with parole release, the relationship between discipline and parole opportunities is "too attenuated" to call for due process protections. Sandin at 7. The Court cited two additional factors the weight of which is difficult to assess. In the discussion of conditions in and out of disciplinary segregation, the Court "note[dl also that the State expunged Conner's disciplinary record with respect to the 'high misconduct' charge 9 months after Conner served time in segregation." Sandin at 7. It is hard to see what significance this fact could have in the Court's analysis, since the liberty deprivation was long since completed by the time of the expungement See Sandin at 15-16 (Breyer, J., dissenting). In a 5-4 decision, its presence suggests the need to hold together a wavering majority by providing a basis to distinguish future, more sympathetic cases. Justice Rehnquist and several of his colleagues would no doubt be happy to read disciplinary segregation out of due process analysis entirely, but it is doubtful that there are five votes presently on the Court for that proposition. The same comments apply to the opinion's concluding sentence, stating that Conner's segregation "was within the range of confinement to be normally expected for one serving an indeterminate term of 30 years to life." Sandin at 7. The length of the prisoner's sentence has no discernible connection with the Court's analysis or any issue in the case, except possibly the comfort level of one or more members of the majority. At first glance, it may look like the Court has come full Circle, reinstating the grievous loss analysis that was displaced in the 1970s by the liberty interest theory. It would be more accurate to describe this decision as raising a new hurdle. The "atypical and significant hardship" standard comes into play only if state law establishes a liberty interest. Moreover, it appears that the existence of liberty interests will continue to be determined by the use of mandatory language and substantive predicates. The case the Court cites in this connection, Board ofPardons v. 6 SUMMER 1995 Allen, 482 U.S. 369 (1987), is an example of this methodology, and the Court suggests no alternative way of determining whether state law has created a liberty interest. The Court also reaffirms that proper due process principles "were correctly established and applied" in Wolff v. McDonnell, which applied the substance of liberty interest analysis-if not the later-developed terminology of substantive predicates and mandatory languageto the Nebraska good time statute. 418 U.S. at 556-57. Thus, Justice Rehnquist's asserted "abandonment of Hewitt's methodology," Sandin at 8 n.5, appears to be no such thing. Rather, that analysis remains, but restricted to the narrower field of "atypical and significant hardships." Either the lack of such a hardship, or the lack of a state-created liberty interest, will defeat a prison due process claim. The practical meaning of "atypical and significant hardship" is far from clear, as the two dissenting opinions emphasized. Justice Ginsburg asked: "What design lies beneath these key words? The Court ventures no examples, leaVing consumers of the Court's work at sea, unable to fathom what would constitute an 'atypical, significant deprivation,' ... and yet not trigger protection under the Due Process Clause directly." Sandin at IO n.2. Similarly, Justice Breyer stated: I am not certain whether or not the Court means this standard to change prior law radically. If so, its generality threatens the law with uncertainty, for some lower courts may read the majority opinion as offering Significantly less protection against deprivation ofliberty, while others ma..v find in it an extension of protection to certain "atJ'Pical" hardships that pre-existing law would not have covered. Sandin at 13. However, it does appear that "atypical and significant hardship" is intended to be a more difficult standard to meet than "grievous loss." It is to be applied "in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life," and the Court's discussion of these "ordinary incidents" is calculated to blur and to trivialize distinctions among the degrees of closeness of confinement. Thus, the opinion notes both that punitive segregation conditions "with insignificant exceptions, mirrored" conditions in administrative segregation and protective custody, and that there were "significant amounts" of lockdown time even for general population inmates at the prison in question. Sandin at 7. The latter point illustrates the Court's attitude to-or detachment from-the realities of prison life. General population prisoners at this maximum security institution were confined to cells for 12 to 16 hours a day, compared to the 23-hour lock-in in punitive segregation. Sandin at 8 n.8. Since lock-in time includes sleeping hours, these figures mean that general population prisoners were locked in for one-fourth to one-half of normal waking hours, while segregation prisoners were locked in for 94% of waking hours-in addition to the exclusion from work, education, and contact with others that segregation entails. This distinction has obvious quantitative significance, as well as immense practical significance to prisoners. Thus, dissenting Justice Breyer's assertion of a "broad middle category," encompassing restrictions severe enough to require due process under the pre-existing liberty interest analysis, is probably not consistent with Justice Rehnquist's approach, which seems designed to narrow the middle ground by pushing as many issues as possible into the category of "minor matters" that are now completely excluded from the reach of the Due Process Clause. But whether Justice Rehnquist's approach would command a majority on a different set of facts is open to question. In any case, it is predictable that certain aspects of prison life that have been subject to due process scrutiny based on state law and regulations will now escape review because they do not meet the "atypical and significant" standard. Classification decisions and job or program assignments probably fall into this category, since almost every prisoner receives them and they are changed with some frequency. Visiting probably will stand on the same footing-at least for short-term or limited deprivations. One member of the Sandin majority has previously expressed the view that "permanently forbidding all visits to some or all prisoners implicates the protections of the Due Process Clause" even if "precise and individualized restrictions" do not. Kentucky Dept. ofCorrections v. Thompson, 490 U.S. 454, 465 (1989) (Kennedy,]., concurring). Parole release is a closer question. Denial of parole, while certainly "significant," is hardly "atypical." The Supreme Court's holding in Greenholtz·v. Inmates ofNebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, 442 U.S. 1 (1979), that state parole statutes can create liberty interests, is described in Sandin as "foreshadowing" the methodology of Hewitt v. Helms that the Sandin Court purports to reject. However, as noted above, the Hewitt methodology appears to survive only in cases that involve "atypical and significant hardship," and nothing in Sandin indicates a view on whether parole release decisions are now to be viewed as "minor matters" exempt from due process scrutiny. The Greenholtz holding concerning liberty interests can be dismissed as dictum without THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL question was presented, Allen's conclusion cannot be dismissed as dictum. Moreover. the Sandin Court cited Allen along with Wolf/in "recogniz[ing] that States may under certain circumstances create liberty interests which are protected by the Due Process Clause," Sandin at 5-which makes it hard to argue that Sandin implicitly overrules Allen. The most significant open questions after Sandin pertain to disciplinary proceedings themselves. Given the Court's reaffirmation of Wol.ffv. McDonnell as a correct application of due process principles, it appears that any case involving deprivation of good time \\"ill meet the "atypical and significant" standard as long as the governing statutes or rules create a liberty interest. And in disciplinary ar PrisDohoject... Prison Project: am in a county jail in the South, andhavebeen harassed a correcti<}Ralofficer. ·Heflittswitll.me,makessexualco1Il2 ts, and has tQuched me. He asks some of the women to se nudefol'hinrQrihave sex with him in exchangeJorciga~ rettes orcon~"-lld.ldon'twant.to·participateandam. afraid. Wbataremy rights? Harassed Dear Harassed: State actors, including prison offiCials, are liable for dep . . 'vidual of constitutional rights, such as thos .prisoners by the Eighth Amendment, und 1983. Prison conditions violate the Eigh t's prohibition against cruel and unusual p . ey result in the "unnecessary and wanton in ." Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294 (1991). T quires that: 1) the pain suffered be "suffich that it violates contemporary standards ) the prison officials acted with a culpable ounting to "deliberate indifference" .01' safety. Farmer v. Brennan, 114 S.Ct. 994). , smentin the form of inappropriate sexual comces or propositions, touching, exposure ts for sexual favors, and forced sexual . . th·ofthese requirements and violates the nt. See Hovater v. Robinson, 1 E3d 1063, 93); Women Prisoners v. District of upp. 634 (D.D.C. 1994). ent may take the form of routine invasions .as men peering into women's cells or showounce their presence in female dorms. al observation of opposite sex prisoners, 'stance, reasonably related to prison nal. Howeyer,reguhl.r viewing of essing, showering, or using the toilet cers violates privacy rights, contributes .of a sexualized environment, and amounts to wanton infliction of pain. Cumbey v. 712, 714 (10th Cir. 1982); see also 983 F.2d 1024 (HthCir. 1993). thas serious physical-andpsychological . . It can cause depression,anxiety, guilt, Opelessness,andit hinders rehabilitation. lyso for female prisoners sillce many female istories being the victims of rape, sexual THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL abuse or sexual assault. Sexual harassment and the physical and psychological distress caused by it violate contemporary standards of decency and satisfy the "sufficiently serious" prong of the above test for ul1necessary and wanton infliction of pain. Id. at 665. To satisfy the "deliberate indifference" prong, an individual ,.must prove that a prison official "knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health and safety." Farmer at 1979. Actual knowledge is necessary, although a court may assume that prison officials knew of the risk if it was "longstanding, pervasive, wen-documented, or expresSly noted by prison offi- . cials in the past, and the ... [official] 'must have known' about it." Id. Awoman need not wait until there is a sexual assault; there may still be an Eighth Amendment violation if conditions are "sure or very likely to cause serious illness and needless suf~ fering." Hellingv. McKinney, 113 S.Ct. 2475,2480 (1993). Both an individual subjected to sexual harassment and other .' . women in a pervasive environment of harassment may therefore seek protection. 1'0 protect your rights, it is important that the prison offi. ciaIs are informed of the harassment. You should file agrievance or complaint. If thisis notpossib~e, you.may be able to~ tell a prison employee and request that they report it. Prison administrators will only.be held liable for a guard's sexual. harassment if they were given notice of the conduct and failed .' '., to take actions to prevent it or protect you from it. In the face of complaints, a prison's lack of a sexual harassment policy or appropriate training ofcorrectional officers about sexual harassment all contribute to a prison administrator's li'ability .' for sexual harassment: If the harassment is pervasive, or if the prison fails to. respond appropriately to an individual occurrence, you should file a § 1983 civil rights suit in federal.court. You need not have a lawyer to file these suits; complaint forms may be obtained from your legal advisor or from the district court upon request. Finally, many states have made it criminal for a guard to . engage in any sexual activity with an inCarcerated person, regardless ofwhether that person voluntarily participates. Consider notifying state prosecutors about the sexual activity. • Karen Bower is a Women~ Law Fellowfrom the Georgetown Unive.rsity Law Center~ Women's law and Public Policy Fellowship Program, working with the NPP for oneyear. . SUMMER 1995 7 cases, courts have held that it is the disciplinary rules themselves that constitute the limit on official discretion that is necessary to give rise to a liberty interest. See Gilbert v. Frazier, 931 F.2d 1581,1582 (7th Cir. 1991); Green v. Ferrell, 801 F.2d 765 (5th Cir. 1986); Sher v. Coughlin, 739 F.2d 77, 81 (2nd Cir. 1984). Thus, all deprivations of good time should continue to invoke the protections of Wolff. As to punitive segregation, all we know after Sandin is that thirty days of it, under conditions similar to administrative segregation, is not atypical and significant. Beyond that, it is unclear to what extent either the duration or the conditions of segregation make a difference. The Court makes much of the similarity of disciplinary segregation to administrative segregation; but if administrative segregation had been less restrictive, would the result have been different for discipinary segregation? The opinion provides no answer to that question. The same question presents itself as to the duration of confinement: since administrative segregation can last indefinitely and in some cases does last for years, it is arguable that the duration of disciplinary segregation makes no difference for due process cases. But that conclusion is hard to square with the explicitly limited holding that" [b] ased on a comparison between inmates inside and outside disciplinary segregation, the State's actions in placing [the plaintiff] there for 30 days did not work a major disruption in his environment." Sandin at 7. Moreover, unlimited punitive segregation could hardly escape the characterization of "atypical, significant deprivation" if those words are applied honestly. This ambiguity is most likely purposeful. Leaving the question of duration open was probably necessary to hold the slim majority together. But this question will by necessity be central to the large amount of lower court litigation that will result from Sandin. Without more specific guidance from the Supreme Court, lower courts will probably look for some objective-or at least external--standard to avoid the entirely subjective line-drawing called for by the phrase "atypical and significant." The most obvious place to look is in the disciplinary system itself. Like Hawaii's prisons, many systems divide disciplinary proceedings into "tiers" or "levels" reflecting the seriousness of the charges, the sanctions available, and the degree of procedural protections provided. Hawaii's distinction between "high" misconduct and "greatest" misconduct-Le., between the possibility of 30 days' disciplinary segregation and a longer terms-prOVides the kind of bright line that 8 SUMMER 1995 courts will probably look for. New York State provides an even sharper line, between disciplinary hearings (also known as Tier II) , with an upper limit of 30 days of punitive confinement, and superintendent's proceedings (Tier Ill), which may impose longer terms of confinement and may also recommend the loss of good time. Adopting the state's own categorizations would be consistent with lower court authority holding that due process rights must be determined with respect to the potential penalty rather than retroactively based on the penalty imposed in a particular case. See, e.g., Alexander v. Ware, 714 F.2d 416, 419 (5th Gil'. 1983); McKinnon v. Patterson, 568 F.2d 930, 939 (2nd Gir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1087 (1978). However, these internal distinctions within disciplinary systems may be of limited utility even if the courts accept their relevance. Increasingly, prison systems use punitive segregation only for short periods of time, such as 30 days or less; prisoners are then placed in administrative segregation if their misconduct was serious. (Hawaii limits even "greatest" misconduct convictions to 60 days in punitive segregation; the fact that a prisoner "has committed ... a serious infraction," without more, is a basis for placement in administrative segregation.) If 30 (or 60) days of punitive segregation is insufficient to invoke due process protections, but if the disciplinary conviction later becomes the basis of protracted administrative segregation, then disciplinary proceedings that de facto result in years of segregation may escape due process scrutiny. One way to approach this problem is directly, by holding that a disciplinary charge that results in protracted segregation requires WoljJs procedural protections, even if part of the segregation is labelled administrative. Such a standard poses practical problems, since it makes the prisoner's entitlement to a hearing turn on events that occur weeks later. Administrative segregation also poses its own problem, completely separate from its relationship to disciplinary proceedings. Sandin purports to reject the reasoning of Hewitt v. Helms with respect to its method for determining whether there is a state-created liberty interest in avoiding administrative segregation. Sandin at 5 and n.5. But, as noted above, the Court reaffirmed that liberty interest analysis remains alive and well for those deprivations that meet the "atypical and significant" standard. One of two conclUSions follows. Either administrative segregation is never atypical and significant and never requires due process: or there is some threshold of duration or of conditions (or both) at which administrathe segregation becomes sufficiently atypical and significant to require due process protections. This is, of course, the same question that was left unanswered for disciplinary segregation after Sandin. This question is made harder to answer by the fundamental sophistry underlying the decision in Hewitt. In that case, Justice Rehnquist stated that administrative segregation appears to be something ofa catchall: it may be used to protect the prisoner's safety, to protect other inmates from a particular prisoner, to break up potentially disruptive groups ofinmates, or simply to await later classification or transfer....Accordingly, administrative segregation is the sort ofconfinement that inmates should reasonably anticipate receiving at some point in their incarceration. 459 U.S. at 468. That conclusion follows only if one fails to separate the very different types of segregation at issue. It is certainly true that every inmate should reasonably anticipate confinement for short periods pending classification or transfer. The same is not true for placement in protective custody or for segregation as an aggressor or a member of a "potentially disruptive group." Such placements remain the exception and not the rule in most prison systems. They also tend to last much longer than pre-transfer or pre-classification placement. Thus, these types of segregation are literay "atypical and significant," and for due process purposes they must be analyzed separately from more routine and short-term uses of administrative segregation. Whether the courts will be willing to acknowledge this reality may determine their decisions in future administrative segregation cases. Other Cases Worth Noting U.S. COURT 01: APPEALS Use of Force/Summary Judgment! Grievances and Complaints about Prison Burgess v. Moore, 39 F.3d 216 (8th Gil'. 1994). Acomplaint and affidavit signed under penalty of perjury were sufficiently verified for purposes of resisting summary judgment. The plaintiff alleged that he disrupted a disciplinary hearing and staff then tried to choke him with a towel around his neck. This allegation could support a jury finding of a maliCiOUS and sadistic desire to inflict harm. .-\t 218: ".-\ choking that produces virtual THE NATIONAl PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL unconsciousness and great pain is not trifling for Eighth Amendment purposes." These allegations made out a claim against a bystander officer who did not intervene. The plaintiff's claim that he was assaulted in retaliation for using prison grievance procedures made out a First Amendment claim regardless of the absence of a distinct injury. At 218: "... [A] threat of retaliation is sufficient injury if made in retaliation for an inmate's use of prison grievance procedures." Transportation to Courts Lemmons v. Law Firm ofMorris and Morris, 39 F.3d 264 (lOth Cir. 1994). The prisoner plaintiff hired a law firm to represent him in a workers' compensation case against his former employers. Twice the court granted a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum and twice a county assistant district attorney intervened to prevent its execution. The plaintiff sued the law firm and the district attorney. The court dismisses the claim against the law firm because it does not act under color of state law. The prosecutor's action was not protected by absolute immunity because it was not a prosecutorial function (the prosecution having been completed months earlier), but an administrative one. Qualified immunity was not pled and in any case would not bar injunctive relief. Although a prisoner generally has no right to attend a civil trial, the writ granted by the Workers Compensation Court "in and of itself gave Mr. Lemmons the legal right to appear in court." (267) His claim that interference with it denied him meaningful access to court was not frivolous. Law Libraries and Law Books! Exercise and Recreation Allen v. City & County ofHonolulu, 39 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 1994). Aprisoner in segregation had a constitutional right to outdoor exercise because he was held "under highly restrictive conditions of confinement on an open-ended and potentially long-term basis." (939) He also had the right to use the law library. At 939: .. .Allen's Fourteenth Amendment right to court access and his Eighth Amendment right to outdoor exercise are not "either/or" rights. An inmate should not have to forego outdoor recreation to which he would otherwise be entitled simply because he exercises his clearly established constitutional right ofaccess to the courts. Both these rights were clearly established. The defendants are not entitled to qualified THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL immunity "simply because Allen cannot produce a case stating that an inmate is entitled to both his constitutional right to use the law library and his right to have outdoor exercise." AIDSlDisabled Gates v. Rowland, 39 F.3d 1439 (9th Cir. 1994). The defendants' blanket exclusion of HIY-positive inmates from food service positions did not violate the Rehabilitation Act, although HIY-positive people are disabled for purposes of the statute. At 1446-47: The issue is how the Act is to be applied in a prison setting. It is clear that HIV-seropositive prisoners have certain statutory rights; but, just as constitutional rights ofprisoners must be considered in light ofthe . reasonable requirements ofeffective prison administration, so must statutory rights applicable to the nation's general population be considered in light ofeffective prison administration. The Act was not designed to deal specifically with the prison environment; it was intendedfor general societal application. There is no indication that Congress intended the Act to apply to prison facilities irrespective ofthe considerations ofthe reasonable requirements ofeffective prison administration. It is highly doubtful that Congress intended a more stringent application ofthe prisoners' statutory rights created by the Act than it would the prisoners' constitutional rights. Thus, we deem the applicable standardfor the review ofthe Act's statutory rights in a prison setting to be equivalent to the review ofconstitutional rights in a prison setting, as outlined by the Supreme Court in Turner v. Safley... The defendants admitted that the risk of HIY transmission through food service was "slight," but argued that inmates' incorrect perceptions of risk and the "particular sensitivity of prisoners to food service" justified their policy (l447). (After all, inmates may think that HIY-positive food service workers "will bleed into the food, spit into the food, or even worse.") The plaintiffs argued that prisoners should be educated about HIY transmission. At 1448: "The prison authorities point out that many members of the general prison population are not necessarily motivated by rational thought and frequently have irrational suspicions or phobias that education will not modify." ClothingiUse of Force Wilkins v. Moore, 40 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 1994). The plaintiff alleged that he was kept naked for over 22 hours in a detention cell with unclean bedding, unclean floors, poor lighting, and no blankets after he refused to write a statement exonerating prison guards for a use of force he had witnessed. He alleged that he was repeatedly physically abused by various officers. The court distinguishes the Eighth Circuit's appalling precedents on the deprivation of clothing by treating it as part of a "course of mistreatment" that included physical abuse as well as strip cell confinement. The deprivation of clothing must be considered along with the physical abuse under the "malicious and sadistic" standard. Recreation and Exercise Allen v. Sakai, 40 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 1994). The plaintiff alleged that while in segregation he was permitted only 45 minutes a week of outdoor recreation. The defendants had a "goal" of five hours a week but said they didn't meet it because of the "logistical difficulties" of taking one inmate at a time to the yard. Since the plaintiff was subject to harsh conditions and indefinite and potentially long-term segregation, in light of Spain v. Procunier the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity. LeMaire v. Maass did not benefit them because in that case the plaintiff had been deprived of outdoor exercise because of his misconduct in segregation. Medical Care Hill v. DeKalb Regional Youth Detention Center, 40 F.3d 1176 (11th Cir. 1994). The court adopts the definition that a serious medical need is "one that has been diagnosed by a physician as mandating treatment or one that is so obvious that even a lay person would easily recognize the necessity of a doctor's attention." (l187) Although it has previously been employed only in other circuits, the court uses it in evaluating claims of qualified immunity. Delay in medical care can violate the Eighth Amendment. At 1187: "Cases stating a constitutional claim for immediate or emergency medical attention have concerned medical n~eds that are obvious even to a layperson because they involve life-threatening conditions or situations where it is apparent that delay would detrimentally exacerbate the medical problem." (Footnote omitted). Procedural Due ProcessDisciplinary ProceedingslImmunityJudicial and Prosecutorial Young v. Selsky, 41 F.3d 47 (2nd Cir. 1994). Astate prison system's disciplinary review officer, who worked in the central office and decided administrative appeals of disciplinary convictions, is not entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity. SUMMER 1995 9 The defendant is not sufficiently independent to justify absolute immunity, since he serves at the pleasure of superiors within the prison system, to whom complaints from other personnel are likely to be directed. It is also very likely the defendant will be called on to rule on policies instituted by his superiors. At 53: ... [Njeither the disciplinalJ' hearing nor the administrative appeal is tru~)' adversarial in nature. Prisoners have no right to counsel in either proceeding. Furthermore, their rights to cross-examine and challenge witnesses and evidence are limited... The disciplinary hearings 'reu' heavi~)' on hearsay, including unverifiable information from prison guards and informants. '.. ..As noted above, the procedurallaxi(J' ofthe disciplinal:J' hearing is not cured on administrative appeal.... Recreation and Exercise/Law Libraries and Law BookS/Qualified Immunity Housley [i. Dodson, 4I F.3d 597 (lOth Cir. 1994). An allegation that the plaintiff was denied all access to legal materials for six months stated a constitutional claim, as did the allegation that he received only 30 minutes of out-of-cell exercise in three months. At 599: "... [W] hat constitutes adequate exercise will depend on the circumstances of each case. including the physical characteristics of the cell and jail and the average length of stay of the inmates." The sheriff and jailer should not have been dismissed on grounds of qualified immunity. At 600: "A reasonable sheriff and jailer must remain apprised of major constitutional developments concerning inmates' rights." Summary Judgment/Special Diets Sellers v. Henman, 41 F.3d 1100 (7th Cir. 1994). Pro se prisoners must receive notice that failure to file counter-affidavits to a summary judgment motion may result in dismissal of their suits. An allegation that the diabetic plaintiff was taken off his special diet in retaliation for his the Record 've Update-The.STOP legislation discussed in· ditions of thejOURNAL is still waiting for action by . The bill (S,400) may become part of the new crime nator Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), iscurrentiy working ay be introduced directly on the floor of the Senate. bel' of groups and individuals who oppose the lege formed the "Coalition Against STOP" and are conir efforts to educate senators on tliemany practical tional problems with the bill. Cutrent and former, staff, youth .and disabiliti rganization, ganizations and traditionalcivil ri ts groups have ners~ rights organizations in opposition to STOP. . ormation contact the Coalition's Coordinator, ott, at 202/234-4830. , .0fthe'Prisoners~RightsPtoject at the Legal Aid Society of New ' ' York and autltor ofCase Law for thejOURNAL, was awarded the 1995 Osborne Medal by the Osborue and Correctional Associations of New York Dr. Kim Thorburn, medical direc~ tor for the Ha artmentof Public Safety and expert wit-" , ness on medic . es in prison conditions cases, received the American Correctional Health Services Association's 1995" Distinguished ServiceAward. Dr, Thorburn was honored for her '~unceasmg'c the rights of prisoners not only the United States"b world wide through her activities.as.• .a member of the board of directors of Amnesty International." .'. Bryan Stevenson of the Alabama Capital Representation Resource Center was recently awarded a MacArthur Fellowship for his untiring work in fighting the death penalty.. , ,.Manual de Pautas de la Comisitm Federal de aign for an EtIective CrimePoli~issued a . ch 1995 concluding that prison has no significant Sentendas, the Spanish translation of the Federal Sentend lent crime and, at most ' est impact on guidelines edited by David S. Zapp, Esq., is available at cost' . e. The report, "What 'cymaker Should to government agencies and groups who are interested in pur~ t Imprisonment and the Crime Rate," was authored chasing in bulk for the pu eof educating Hispanic offend,l' Walter Dickey ofthe University of Wisconsin Law ers, Individual copies are each from Public onjunctionwith the Advisol'yCommittee of the Legales en Espaiiol~ 'sades Park, Looking at the states and Texas, the 800/432-0004, The 0 shipping .charge for those who mention the n Project. All funds raised from . that dUring the 1980s popUlation in only 14% while in California it increased by '(Jufas will be used f()rthe , the distributio ite these large disparities, violent crime rose in '. •translation f . s, including the Federal by about 21%, Imprisonment rates'have little .Rules 0 ellate Procedure, the Federal ncrime for various reasons including: demographics ..Rules o Sections 2255 'and 2254 post~ . ,rates fluctuate with the proportion of the population ' .' . conviction motio 4 "high crime" years; the criminal justice system yasmall fra of crime 90% of crimes iii Washington inDecemberto . orted to poli solved; most violent crime is stein for allhis work with the pulsively; often under the inftuence of drugs or otherate:is ofCivilatid human sothat threats ofpunishment h 'ttle deterrent you will be able to join us in perpies ofthe report tan beo , . . Om the CECp, ssible, and you have a particular NW,Suite 505, Waslllngtonjf}(}20004, ouwould like to share with his e send it to us here at the Project. 1903. ,. g we receive and present it to 'eIidSofthe Prison Project receivedwell-deserved him inDecembedanymaterial you would like included n for their work recently - Jobii Boston, Director , to JenniGainsboroughilt the NPP (address on page 2). 10 SUMMER 1995 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL complaints and that the diet he was put on has too few calories and too much saturated fat is ·'substantial." (1102) Summary Judgment/fransfers/ Procedural Due Process-Transfers Schroeder v. McDonald, 41 F.3d 1272 (9th Cir. 1994). The plaintiff alleged that his return from a minimum security prison to the medium security prison from which he had been transferred was motivated by retaliation for his complaints and litigation. The plaintiff's verified complaint based on his personal knowledge of admissible evidence was a sufficient response to a summary judgment motion. It is clearly established that the defendants cannot transfer a prisoner to punish him for filing litigation. However, the defendants could have believed that their transfer was Imrful because the plaintiff committed seven rule violations in his first 16 days at the new prison and because his demands for law library access and legal materials overburdened the prison's limited staff. He had also previously used or threatened force against a staff member at the medium facility, which the defendants did not know at the time of the initial transfer. The transfer denied due process. Aprison policy stating that an inmate must be classified according to the level or risk he presents, which" [speaks] in mandatory terms about how the classification of prisoners should be conducted," created a liberty interest. The transfer violated clearly established law "that defendants must follow mandatory prison regulations," since the plaintiff's score was 9 and 21 was required to justify the transfer. Ex Post Facto Laws/Procedural Due Process-Temporary Release/Crowding Hock 1'. Singletary', 41 F.3d 1470 (lIth Cir. 1(95). The petitioner was made ineligible for "control release" (release to keep prison population within capacity limits) based on his criminal conviction by a statute passed after he had committed the crime. The statute is "procedural" and does not affect the "quantum of punishment" and therefore its retroactive application does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. It is different from good time statutes, which have been subjected to Ex Post Facto analysis, because it operates for the convenience of the Department of Correction. Since it is "arbitrary and unpredictable" from the inmate's standpoint, the inmate has no reasonable expectation that he will be able to use it to reduce his sentence. The statute also does not create an expectation enforceable under the Due Process Clause. THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Color of LawlMedical Care Conner v. Donnelly, 42 F.3d 220 (4th Cir. 1994). Aprivate physician who provides medical services to a state prisoner acts under color of state law even if he does not have a contractual relationship with the prison. (He did get paid.) At 225: Regardless ofwhether the private physician has a contractual duty or simply treats a prisoner without a formal arrangement with the prison, the ph)lsician'sfunction within the state system is the same: the state authorizes the physician to provide medical care to the prisoner, and the prisoner has no choice but to accept the treatment offered by the physician. Even where a physician does not have a contractual relationship with the state, the physician can treat a prisoner only with the state's authorization.... [T1he physician acts under color ofstate law because the state has incarcerated the prisoner and denied him the possibility of obtaining adequate medical care on his own. Statutes of LimitationslHazardous Conditions and Substances Nasim v. Warden, Md. House of Correction, 42 F.3d 1472 (4th Cir. 1995). The plaintiff's pro se complaint should not have been dismissed as frivolous. He alleged that he was exposed to a toxic substanceasbestos-that endangered his health and made specific allegations as to "how and why" his rights were violated, Le., by permitting asbestos to fall from the ceiling into his cell. While these allegations are "unlikely," they are not "nonsensical." At 1475: "... [A] claim that prison officials have purposely or with deliberate indifference exposed a prisoner to a toxic substance...does have a constitutional basis, Le., the Eighth Amendment." Adistrict court should only dismiss a complaint as frivolous on limitations grounds when the time bar is clear from the face of the complaint. Although the actions complained of occurred outside the limitations period, the claim did not accrue until the plaintiff knew or had reason to know of the injury, and it is not clear that the plaintiff knew of the possible causal connection between asbestos and his health problems until much later. Use of Force/State Officials and Agencies Pelfrey v. Chambers, 43 F.3d 1034 (6th Cir. 1995). The allegation that correctional officers forcibly cut off the plaintiff's hair with a knife stated an Eighth Amendment claim. The district court incorrectly held that a "spontaneous, isolated assault by a prison guard on an inmate is not punishment within the Eighth Amendment" and that action must "be imposed for a penal or disciplinary purpose" to constitute punishment. Authority to this effect, such as]ohnson v. Glick, is no longer good law. At 1037: ... [Ilt would certainly appear that defendants' actions (assuming arguendo that defendants committed the acts alleged in plaintiff's complaint) were designed to frighten and degrade Pelfrey by reinforcing the fact that his continued well-being was entirely dependent on the good humor ofhis armed guards. To us, given the closed nature ofthe prison environment, this constitutes a totally unwarranted, malicious and sadistic use offorce to cause harm. We categorically reject defendants' argument that "an unprovoked attack is not punishment. " To hold otherwise would ignore the power arrangements that exist within the prison environment and lead to the anomalous result in which a prisoner who is assaulted after having provoked a guard can state a cognizable claim for a constitutional violation while his eel/mate who is assaulted for absolutely no reason is afforded only that reliefpermitted by state law. [Emphasis in original] Disabled/Qualified Immunity Lue v. Moore, 43 F.3d 1203 (8th Cir. 1994). Both damages and affirmative relief are available under the Rehabilitation Act. Qualified immunity is also available. At 1205: "The broad language of Harlow v. Fitzgerald ... suggests qualified immunity should normally be available in civil damages lawsuits unless Congress has stated otherwise." The blind plaintiff's claim did not establish a Rehabilitation Act violation; after he was told that there were no vocational programs for. blind inmates, he did not apply for them anyway or request that a program be provided for him. At 1206: "... [T]he Rehabilitation Act also does not require the invention of new programs designed for handicapped individuals." Nor were prison officials required to send him out of the prison for training. Law Libraries and Law Books/lnmate Legal Assistance/Access to CourtsServices and Materialsffelephones/ Attorney Consultation Casey v. Lewis, 43 F.3d 1261 (9th Cir. 1994). At 1266: "The importance of this right SUMMER 1995 11 [court access) cannot be overstated. It is the right upon which all other rights depend." The state has the burden of showing that it has provided meaningful court access, and the district court correctly concluded that it had not. The text of its remedial order is appended. The district court correctly concluded that the contents of the law library were inadequate. Some reporter volumes and pocket parts of secondary sources were missing. At 1266: "Updated inventories are unquestionably an essential element of an adequate library system." Also, some libraries did not have self-help manuals. Id.: "The complexities of legal research at the very least require these aids to enable inmates to use the books effectively." At 1270: The district court reasonably required the provision of Pacific Reporters and Digests. Inmates may be denied physical access to the law library only when it would threaten institutional security. At 1267: "... [U)nless [defendants) can demonstrate actual security risks, an inmate should be allowed access to the law library. The district court correctly concluded that [defendants) may not routinely prohibit lockdown inmates from physically using the law library." (Footnote omitted) At 1271: This does not mean that defendants can't bar a prisoner until harm has occurred; a rational justification would be sufficient. At 1267: "Sufficient numbers of trained legal assistants also must be provided to prisoners who are functionally illiterate or whose primary language is not English." The failure to provide bilingual assistants or clerks denies meaningful access and is not remedied by reliance on other, untrained inmates. The defendants argued that providing a law library removed the barriers to court access erected by imprisonment. At 1268: "This argument is without merit because [the defendants) overlook[) the fact that the restrictions on a prisoner's liberty attendant to imprisonment prevents [sic) the prisoner from enlisting the assistance of his family, friends, and a myriad of social services and legal aid organizations that would otherwise be available." At 1270: The district court has discretion to require both law library services and legal assistance in its remedy. At 1271: The requirement of a "training videotape" does not constitute legal assistance to all prisoners; the court merely concluded that it would help make the law library accessible to all prisoners. The district court correctly concluded that staffing the libraries only with security officers was inadequate. At 1268: "Library staff should at least have some basic knowledge of legal research." At 1271: The district court properly required that each library have a 1 '? CI 11.uACO 100,;;: librarian with a law degree, a library science degree, or a paralegal degree. At 1269: Because an inmate's access to his attorney is inextricably tied to his meaningful access to the courts, we reject Defendant's argument that to state a claim, Plaintiffs need to allege an actual instance in which their access to the courts has been impeded. [Footnote omitted.) The district court correctly concluded that restrictions such as limitation of calls to issues relating to a prisoner's sentence, the granting of calls according to institutional risk score rather than need, and the requirement that a prisoner divulge the nature of the call unjustifiably interfered with court access. At 1271: An order requiring at least three twenty-minute attorney calls a week at the inmate's expense is affirmed. The district court defined the standard for indigency for purpose of providing free supplies as $46. Although the evidence supports that standard, the district court did not make an explicit finding to that effect, and the court remands for a proper finding. The court notes in passing that evidence that the $22 existing standard prevented prisoners from purchasing adequate supplies met the "actual injUry" standard. The defendants' photocopying policy denied meaningful access to the courts because plaintiffs had to give their materials to staff to be copied, breaching their confidentiality. (The district court found that some documents had been read by staff.) These allegations also met the "actual injury" standard. The defendants' petition for certiorari has been granted. Procedural Due ProcessDisciplinary Proceedings/ Pro Se Litigation Janke v. Price, 43 F.3d 1390 (lOth Cir. 1994). The plaintiff complained that he was not allowed to present witnesses at his disciplinary hearing. The magistrate judge held a Martinez hearing and improperly resolved facts concerning the hearing against the plaintiff, resulting in dismissal. A Martinez hearing is "a tool to sort and clarify issues raised in a pro se complaint," not a means of resolving factual disputes. Also, it was error to consider matters outside the pleadings in deciding whether the complaint stated a claim. Suicide Prevention Frey v. City ofHerculaneum , 44 F.3d 667 (8th Cir. 1995), vacating 37 F.3d 1290 (8th Cir. 1994). Here's yet another case of an intoxicated person who was arrested and hanged himself in jail. The decedent's father has standing to assert a § 1983 claim for his son's injury and death, either in his own name, or as administrator. However, the right to recover is governed by the state's law of survival of actions, and the district court must determine whether the plaintiff can bring both a wrongful death and a personal injury action under § 1983 applying Missouri law. Rehabilitation/Procedural Due Process-Temporary Release Browning v. Vernon, 44 F.3d 818 (9th Cir. 1995). The plaintiffs are assigned to Idaho's "Rider Program," under which courts may retain jurisdiction of persons convicted of felonies and place them in prison initially for purposes of being evaluated for potential release on probation. Under the relevant procedures, prison staff prepare and notify the inmates of the initial recommendation and permit them to read (but not keep) all evaluations; anybody with a negative recommendation is immediately placed in segregation. About 24 hours later, the inmate is given a hearing and allowed to rebut any information or recommendation, calling members of the staff and other inmates as witnesses. Afinal report is then sent to the sentencing court. The plaintiffs alleged that these procedures violate due process because 24 hours is not sufficient notice, they are not given copies of the relevant documents to help them prepare for the hearing, and their placement in segregation means they cannot speak to their attorneys, contact witnesses, or have access to the law library. The plaintiffs have a liberty interest in an "objective and reliable rehabilitation report" under state law; the Idaho Supreme Court said so. The state court went on to place "clear limits on official discretion" by requiring minimum due process protections, holding that state officials "have a duty to supply the sentencing court with a fair assessment of the inmate's rehabilitative potential and [specifying) the due process requirements needed to ensure the report's accuracy." (821) The feder.al court says it agrees with the state court. TriallRestraints Davidson v. Riley, 44 F.3d 1118 (2d Cir. 1995). The district court required the pro se plaintiff to wear handcuffs and leg irons during his civil trial, stating that he "should be treated as those people in charge of you think you should be treated." (1120) The correction officers justified keeping him restrained because he was an escape risk. However, escape charges had been expunged in two prior state court decisions, and an Attica Deputy Superintendent had determined that he would no longer be considered an escape risk. THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Physical restraints are to be used as a last resort in civil as well as criminal trials. They may be used "when the court has found those restraints to be necessary to maintain safety or security, but the court must impose no greater restraints than are necessary, and it must take steps to minimize the prejudice resulting from the presence of the restraints." (1122-23) The court must exercise its discretion and not defer entirely to those guarding the prisoner. If the court has exercised its discretion, review wiII be for abuse of discretion. If the court has failed to exercise its discretion, harmless error analysis wiII apply, and the court should consider "the strength of the case in favor of the prevailing party and what effect the restraints might have had given the nature of the issues and evidence involved in the trial." (I 124) Here, the court abdicated its discretion to the officers; it failed to hold a hearing although one was clearly needed; and it made no substantial effort to minimize the prejudicial effect of restraints. Anew trial is ordered. DISTRICT COURTS ReIigion-PracticeslFederal Prisons and Officials Howard v. United States, 864 F.Supp. 1019 (D.Colo. 1994). The plaintiff, a Satanist, is granted a preliminary injunction requiring prison officials to provide time and space for his Satanic rituals, and barring the defendants from restricting the plaintiff's access to candles, candle holders, incense, a gong or bell, a black robe, a chalice, and an object suitable for pointing to any greater degree than any other religious group's. This case was decided under the Turner test and not the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court notes that many of the supposed security risks involved in the plaintiff's practices (e.g., use of hooded robes) also apply to practices that other groups are permitted. The court concludes that they are pretextual. Other arguments are completely speculative-e.g., that the plaintiff's beliefs would place him in jeopardy (he read Satanic literature in public and wore Satanic medaIliol).s). The court does not credit the claim that Satanism is opposed (0 the rehabilitative goals of prison, since the plaintiff's version of Satanism does not include drinking blood and eating flesh. Use of Force/Classification-Race Burton v. Kuchel, 865 F.Supp. 456 (\.D.IlI. 1994). Evidence that an officer shored the plaintiff against a wall did not support an Eighth Amendment claim in the absence of injury. However, a "gratuitous punch in the stomach is of sufficient gravity" THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL to go to a jury, regardless of lack of injury. An alleged retaliatory motive goes to "know- ing willingness that harm occur," so its presence means that a lesser showing of injury is needed to establish wantonness. Evidence that an officer read the plaintiff's legal mail supported a constitutional claim. Evidence that the plaintiff was subjected to daily strip searches was sufficient to "justify an inference of calculated harassment" and avert summary judgment. Evidence of gratuitous physical attacks and repeated abusive strip searches and destruction of property support a claim for retaliation for filing a grievance. However, the plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence of racial animus on the part of any defendant except for the one who called him "nigger." Use of Force/Standing Fierro v. Gomez, 865 F.Supp. 1387 (N.D.Cal. 1994). Execution by lethal gas constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Prisoners had standing to challenge this form of execution even though they were given the option to select lethal injection. (Many capital defendants refused to make an election.) Procedural Due Process-Visiting Gavin v. McGinnis, 866 F.Supp. ll07 (N.D.IlI. 1994). Aprison regulation that provides that prisons "shall permit every committed person to receive visitors, except in case of abuse of the visiting privilege or when the chief administrative officer determines that such visiting would be harmful or dangerous to the security, safety, or morale of the institution or facility" creates a liberty interest protected by due process. However, the defendant Assistant Warden was not shown to be personally responsible for the denial of the plaintiff's visit or to have failed to respond to widespread abuses. The defendant was also entitled to qualified immunity despite the prior existence of one reported and two unreported cases in the same district holding that the regulation created a liberty interest. Procedural Due ProcessDisciplinary Proceedings Gilbertv. Selsky, 867 F.Supp. 159 (S.D.N.Y. 1994). An official who reviews disciplinary determinations is not entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity. There was no evidence to support the plaintiff's conviction for theft. Facility records showed that he had not been in the relevant area during the preceding ten days, he was not found with any of the stolen property, and many other people had access to the area. Hearsay from an informant whose reliability was unknown could not meet the "some evidence" standard. The refusal to call the officer who allegedly permitted the plaintiff into the area of the theft, other officers who could vouch for the plaintiff's whereabouts during the relevant time period, and inmate clerks who had access to the stolen materials, denied due process; the claim that they were irrelevant was bogus. No security issue was raised. Searches-Visitors and Staff Varrone v. Bilotti, 867 F.Supp. 1145 (E.D.N.Y. 1994). Prison visitors retain a Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, although their expectation of privacy is diminished relative to that outside prison. Courts have adopted a "reasonable suspicion" standard to govern strip searches of visitors. When authorities rely on information from a confidential informant, the tip must have some indicia of reliability, Le., linkage to other objective facts. Generalized suspicions of drug smuggling do not justify the strip search of a particular 'visitor unless there is information about that person. The visitor's supposed consent to the search did not waive his Fourth Amendment rights because the result would have been to waive the visit. Nor does the posting of a general warning sign about searches mean that anyone who visits can be strip searched. An officer who performed the search cannot escape liability on the ground that he was not involved in making the decision to search. The defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity because the law of the Supreme Court, Second Circuit, and other appeals courts "collectively" established the reasonable suspicion standard. The court cites the general balancing test of Bell v. Wolfish, the Second Circuit's application of a reasonable suspicion standard to prison staff by analogy to visitors, and the unanimity of circuits that had addressed the question directly. Departmental rules "bolster the conclusion that the rights asserted by plaintiff were delineated clearly at the time of the March 1989 search." (1l53) The plaintiffs are entitled to add defendants after the expiration of the limitations period because the claims relate back to the filing of the initial complaint. The defendants in question either are or would be represented by the Attorney General, who represents all the existing defendants, and those attorneys knew or should have known that additional defendants would be added. The court weighs the fact that the plaintiff was proceeding pro se and was not in a position to identify all defendants before suing. SUMMER 1995 13 Use of ForcelMedical CareStandards of Liability! Pro Se Litigation GUidry v. Jefferson County Detention Center, 868 F.Supp. 189 (E.D.Tex. 1994). The Jefferson County Detention Center is not a proper defendant. The plaintiff is given the opportunity to amend his complaint to include the county itself, which has notice of the suit through commonality of representation. At 191: "Where a lay person confronts with [sic] the morass attorneys and judges call civil procedure, mistakes may occur for which dismissal or other disposition may· work an injustice." The plaintiff alleged that he was in a fight with another inmate and that an officer, rather than trying to stop the fight, punched him in the face. The defendants' answer alone did not entitle them to summary judgment. The plaintiff alleged inadequate medical care. The defendants' allegation that he received medical attention on three dates did not entitle them to summary judgment. At 198: The quantity ofthe plaintiffs treatment is not dispositive issue [sic} in an Eighth Amendment medical care claim. Instead, such a claim may rest on omissions or acts, that is, the quality ofthe care. The defendant could assert that plaintiff saw a doctor every day for an entire month, but if the doctor did not treat a known and serious medical need, or rendered malicious treatment, then a cause ofaction would still lie. [Emphasis in original.} Medical Care-Standards of Liability Sappington v. Ulrich, 868 F.Supp. 194 (E.D.Tex. 1994). The plaintiff broke his fooi and was not sent to a hospital for five months. He also did not receive a splint as prescribed by the jail doctor. These allegations are sufficient to withstand summary judgment against the doctor and the prison's health administrator, who had actual knowledge of the injury. The fact that the plaintiff received some treatment did not negate the defendants' liability. The plaintiff's submission of complaint forms to the health administrator was sufficient to establish that defendant's personal responsibility at this stage. Medical Care Flood v. Hardy, 868 F.Supp. 809 (E.D.N.C. 1994). The decedent was observed diving off the upper cell bunk and talking to himself incessantly. The sheriff allegedly got a judge to authorize by telephone releasing the dece- 14 SUMMER 1995 dent from his seven-day sentence and taking him to the hospital with instructions that he was responsible for his own bill. However, there is no evidence that he called the decedent's health problems to the judge's attention. Since the sheriff and deputy knew that the decedent was in "a state of mental and physical peril" and "in no condition to be turned out on his own," they were not entitled to qualified immunity. Publications Kalasho v. Kapture, 868 F.Supp. 882 (E.D.Mich. 1994). The plaintiff was not permitted to receive a catalog because of a prison regulation forbidding prisoners to receive third class/bulk rate mail. (The regulations permitted the receipt of catalogs "subject to the limitations of this rule. ") The policy is not unconstitutional under the Turner standard. It serves to avoid a "tremendous influx" of incoming mail that would present problems of smuggling contraband, hiding contraband and complicating searches, fire hazards, and accumulation of excess property. The regulation is neutral. The plaintiff has alternatives; the catalog is available in the prison store and the plaintiff had ordered items from the company in the past. Accommodating prisoners might overwhelm prison staff and it would tax prison resources at the expense of first class mail. The plaintiff showed no easy alternative to the policy. (This decision is in conflict with an unreported decision from another Michigan district.) Medical Care-Standards of Liability-Deliberate Indifference TaJllor v. Anderson, 868 F.Supp. 1024 (N.D.IlI. 1994). The plaintiff alleged that after the prison contracted with the Service America Corporation he did not receive a diet that he could eat consistently with his diabetes. His claim that he had informed prison officials of his condition and complained to them about his meals sufficiently stated a deliberate indifference claim. The allegation that the defendant has threatened his health and endangered his life by failing to provide him with the required diet sufficiently alleges a serious medical need; more detailed pleading is not necessary. (The defendants had argued that since diabetes can vary from person to person, more specific allegations were necessary.) Use of ForcelPre-Trial DetaineeslDisabled Telfair v. Gilberg, 868 F.Supp. 1396 (S.D.Ga. 1994). Under both the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process Clause, the law is clear enough that "choking a physically handicapped detainee and knocking him over might constitute a constitutional tort." (1403) The defendant is not immune from the state law assault and battery claim, since the plaintiff's allegations may establish "malicious or corrupt" action defeating state law official immunity. Eighth Amendment standards do not govern the use of force against pre-trial detainees. The Bell v. Wolfish standard is not designed for use of force cases. The court develops the following standard (at 1412): ... First, search for evidence that the use afforce was intended to punish the detainee.... This intent inquilJ' is not substantially different than the current Eighth Amendment requirement, although intentionally easierfor a plaintiffto meet. Second, if there is no dil'ect evidence ofintent. determine (I) whether a legitimate interest in the use afforce is evident from the circumstances, and (2) if so, whether the force used was necessary to further that interest.... As in Hudson v. McMillian, the detainee would not be required to sholl' severe injuries.... If the jail officialfails either prong, his conduct violated the pretrial detainee's due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Procedural Due ProcessAdministrative SegregationlRes Judicata and Collateral Estoppel Giano v. Kel!;)), 869 F.Supp. 143 (W.D.N.Y. 1994). The plaintiff was released from punitive segregation after an escape attempt and then was placed in administrative segregation after he was stabbed. There is a liberty interest under state regulations in remaining free from administrative segregation. The plaintiff received the same justification for his retention in segregation on 70 separate review forms, which cited events that happened at another prison, including his stabbing, which had not been explained. However. the court noted that another inmate had provided information about the stabbing that had apparently never been investigated. At 150; "In order to justify an inmate's continuing confinement in administrative segregation, prison officials must be prepared to offer evidence that the periodic reviews held are substantive and legitimate, not merely a 'sham.''' The defendants are not entitled to summary judgment on these facts. Nor are they entitled to qualified immunity, since the right to "meaningful" review was clearly established. THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Crowding Tabech v. Gunter, 869 F.Supp. 1446 (D.~eb. 1994). The court's prior injunction against random double ceiling of new admissions was not affected by the Helms Amendment to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The statute does not apply to these cases because they are not "crowding" cases. Also, the statute by its terms refers only to cases involving an "individual plaintiff inmate" and not to class actions. In addition, there was sufficient evidence in the record to support relief as to each plaintiff, named or unnamed. The court refers to el"idence showing that "violent cellmate confrontations are routine" and that double ceiling is "the primary factor leading to violent attacks" between cellmates, among other points. At 1452: "There is nothing in the Act \I"hich prohibits a court from concluding that the trial evidence is sufficient to establish an Eighth Amendment violation regarding every member of a class even though the court may not (and probably would not) know the name of each class member." Finally, the relief sought does not employ a population ceiling and does not extend further than necessary to remove the unconstitutional conditions. \O\-PRISOi\ CASES Consent Judgments/Contempt! ~odification ofJudgments Barcia v. Sitkin, 865 F.Supp. 1015 (S.D.\.Y. 1994). Aconsent decree provided for yarious substantive obligations as well as a .. \lonitoring Period." The substantive obligations continued for the life of the decree and did not end with the expiration of the Monitoring Period. The court finds the defendants in violation of I"arious provisions of the decree and orders them to clean up their act. In some cases it prescribes future actions which appear to amount to modification of the judgment without discussion of the modification standards. The court holds the defendants in contempt but declines to order sanctions, though they may be imposed based on further noncompliance. The court extends the monitoring period for two years. Contempt Sell" York State National Organization for !fO/llell 1'. Terry, 41 F.3d 794 (2d Cir. 1994). \oncompensatory fines totalling $500,000 imposed for civil contempt without the protections of the criminal process must be I"acated under Bagwell. Pleading lUcks 1'. MississiPPi State Employment Sen·ice. 'il F.3d 991 (5th Cir. 1995). When a THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL defendant is entitled to a qualified immunity defense, discovery must not proceed until the court finds that the plaintiff has asserted facts sufficient to overcome the defense. This "heightened pleading" requirement requires "more than bald allegations and conclusionary statements. [The plaintiff] must allege facts specifically focusing on the conduct of [the defendant] which caused his injUry." (995, footnote omitted) The seeming unfairness of this policy "is tempered by this circuit's directives to allow a plaintiff initially failing to state a claim the opportunity to amend or supplement the pleadings freely, so that he may state his best case." (997, footnote omitted) Attorneys' Fees and Costs Lunday v. Cit), ofAlban)', 42 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. 1994). The plaintiff recovered $35,000 for excessive force against one officer in a case where he had sought damages against other officers and the City for excessive force, unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution. The district court was not required to reduce the lodestar to reflect the unsuccessful claims because these were not "wholly unrelated" to the successful claims. Afee award of $118,000 on a $35,000 verdict is upheld. Attorneys' Fees Wilcox v. City ofReno, 42 F.3d 550 (9th Cir. 1994). The plaintiff was awarded $1.00 in a use of force case against the municipality. The district court award of $66,535 in fees is upheld. At 554: "Nothing in Farrar ... suggests that district courts may never award fees to a party who recovers only nominal damages." However, to justify an award, there must be some other way in which the litigation succeeded. Here, the fact that a jury found a municipal policy of excessive force that caused the plaintiff's injuries, which may collaterally estop the defendant in other cases, is significant. In addition, the district court held (at 556): "Exposing an unconstitutional policy of this sort within the city police department does a great deal more than a finding that a plaintiff's rights have been infringed upon in some unspecified way. The police department itself, and the community at large benefit from a finding of this sort." Moreover, the City admitted that there had been a change of policy, Le., a prohibition on fist strikes to the face, though they claimed it had nothing to do with the litigation. Also, the officer was disciplined, and his misconduct might not have come to light without the lawsuit. Class Actions-Certification of Classes Baby Neal for and by Kanter v. Casey, 43 F.3d 48 Od Cir. 1994). At 56-57: The commonalit)' requirement will be satisfied ifthe named plaintiffs share at least one question offact or law with the grievances ofthe prospective class....Because the requirement may be satisfied by a single common issue, it is easily met....Furthermore, class members can assert such a single common complaint even ifthey have not all suffered actual injury; demonstrating that all class members are subject to the same harm will suffice.... * * * ... (Rule 23}(b) (2) classes have been certified in a legion ofcivil rights cases where commonality findings were based primarily on the fact that defendant's conduct is central to the claims ofall class.members irrespective oftheir individual circumstances and the disparate effects ofthe conduct.... * * * Even where individualfacts and circumstances do become important to the resolution, class treatment is not precluded. Classes can be certifiedfor certain particularized issues, and, under well-established principles ofmodern case management, actions are frequently bifurcated. With respect to typicality, even "relatively pronounced factual differences" do not preclude meeting the requirement where there is a strong similarity of legal theories. At 58: "Where an action challenges a policy or practice, the named plaintiffs suffering one specific injury from the practice can represent a class suffering other injuries, as long as all the injuries are shown to result from the practice." In this challenge to provision of statutorily mandated child care services, "[t]he district court will ... not need to make individual, case-by-case determinations in order to assess liability or order relief. Rather, the court can fashion precise orders to address speCific, system-wide deficiencies and then monitor compliance relative to those orders." (64) • John Boston is the director ofthe Prisoners' Rights Project, LegalAid Society ofNew York. He regularly contributes this column to the NPPJOURNAL. SUMMER 1995 15 Index to Articles KEY The NPP JOURNAL is published quarterly, each Winter, Spring, Summer and Fall. The following key identifies the quarter and year of publication by issue number. Issue#: #1-2 Fall-Winter 1984 #3-6 SpringSpring-Winter 1985 #7-10 Spring-Winter 1986 #11-14 Spring-Winter 1987 #15-17 Spring-Fall 1988 #18-21 Winter-Fall 1989 #22 Winter 1990 Vo1.5, No.2-4 Spring-Fall 1990 Vo1.6, No.I-4 Winter-Fall 1991 Vo1.7, No.I-4 Winter-Fall 1992 Vo1.8, No.I-4 Winter-Fall 1993 Vo1.9, No.I-4 Winter-Fall 1994 Vol.IO, No.I-3 Winter-Summer 1995 Note: In Spring 1990, the NPP JOURNAL began using a volume-numbering system. In the index below, articles from issues prior to Spring 1990 list issue and page number followed by the year of publication (e.g., 3/21-1985). Articles from the Spring 1990 issue onward list volume, issue, page number and year of publication (e.g., VoI.5/2/61990). Please note that this Index includes only select listings from the Case Law Report section. Those listings are identified by a "CL" at the end of the issue reference, Le., VoI.7/2/6CL-1992. ·A· AIYETORO, ADJOA A. Profile of NPP lawyer, political activist ACCESS TO THE COURTS Mecklenburg prison obstructs lawyer access Florida opens capital appeals office The serious shortage of death penalty lawyers Lawsuit increases legal access on Louisiana death row Can officials prevent prisoners from offering legal assistance? 3/2-1985 7/1-1986 12/1-1987 VoI.6/2/15-1991 VoI.8/1I20-1993 ADMINISTRATIVE SEGREGATION Ad. seg. conditions in Arizona prison challenged Settlement reached in Arizona case 113-1984 5/4-1985 AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome), HIV VIRUS NPP gathers the facts on AIDS in prison Results of AIDS in prison survey (1985) Medical expert cites problems in AIDS screening Balanced response needed to AIDS in prison AIDS policies raise civil liberties concerns NPP establishes AIDS Project NPP releases AIDS Bibliography Correctional health care: past and future Astudy of New York inmates with AIDS NPP gathers statistics on AIDS in prison Results of AIDS in prison survey (1988) NPP hires AIDS project coordinator Alabama case challenges AIDS policies NPP releases three AIDS publications Abrief history of AIDS in prison Interview with Billy S. Jones, Whitman-Walker Clinic Spanish AIDS booklet available 16 SUMMER 1995 No uniformity in AIDS policies 21114-1989 Prisoners form AIDS peer education groups 21114-1989 More states mainstreaming HIV prisoners 22/18-1990 Mandatory AIDS testing on the rise 22/18-1990 Voluntary AIDS testing more effective 22/18-1990 Not all states providing AIDS drugs 22/18-1990 Review of N. Freudenberg's AIDS education book VoI.5/2/17-1990 AIDS education program for Rikers Island women VoI.5/3/18-1990 Natl. Commission on AIDS holds hearing Vol. 5/4126-1990 NPP's AIDS Project advocates programs, education VoI.6/1I3-1991 Criminalizing the AIDS epidemic VoI.611/18-1991 States mainstreaming HIV+ prisoners VoI.6/2/18-1991 Ex-prisoner with AIDS speaks at NPP forum VoI.6/3/18-1991 Women prisoners develop AIDS education program VoI.6/4I18-1991 TB a threat to prisoners, especially if HIV+ Vol. 711/1-1992 NPP AIDS Coordinator looks back Vol. 7/1/21-1992 NY alliance advocates for inmates with AIDS Vol. 7/2/18-1992 Progress slow on medical parole VoI.7/3/18-1992 Condom distribution VoI.7/4/26-1992 Activists for prisoners with AIDS VoI.8/1I22-1993 AIDS peer educators VoI.8/2/22-1993 NY medical parole law VoI.8/3118-1993 AIDS education for women VoI.8/4I18-1993 Women's peer education programs VoI.9/1/22-1994 Discharge planning for AIDS prisoners VoI.9/2/18-1994 Interview with Theodore Hammett VoI.9/3/18-1994 In Memory: Joann Walker and Jim Magner Vol.9/4I18-1994 Segregation in Alabama Vol.I0/1I18-1995 Florida AIDS care unit Vo1.l0/2/18-1995 National conference on women liVing with HIV/AIDS Vol.I 0/3/30-1995 6/1-1985 6/4-1985 6/5-1985 7/1-1986 10/10-1986 11116-1987 12/13-1987 13/29-1987 1517-1988 16/5-1988 16/6-1988 16/14-1988 17/8-1988 17/26-1988 19/13-1989 20/14-1989 20/15-1989 Vol. 5/413-1990 ALABAMA An expert's view of the Alabama case 8/12-1986 Former NPP lawyer remembers Alabama case 13/8-1987 Reflections of an expert witness 13113-1987 Alabama case challenges AIDS policies 17/8-1988 Alabama prison-monitoring committee folds 20/1-1989 Alabama changes policy on juveniles in adult jails VoI.5/2/6-1990 Segregation of HIV/AIDS prisoners Vo1.l0/1I18-1995 ALEXANDER, ELIZABETH Interview with NPP lawyer Alexander VoI.6/4I14-1991 ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION Surveys show support for alternatives 9/1-1986 Examining community service alternatives 10113-1986 Prison not always answer for female offenders 10/11-1986 Alternatives only option for D.C. 11113-1987 Few alternative programs exist for women 12/9-1987 Imprisoned mothers face extra hardships 1411-1987 InvolVing victims and offenders in sentencing 1419-1987 Alternatives part of agreement in Maryland jail case 15/13-1988 Sentencing guidelines encourage alternatives 18/1-1989 Maryland jail case encourages alternatives 18/11-1989 Alternatives aid Washington prison population decrease 19/1-1989 Citizen participation in corrections 20/12-1989 Electronic monitoring in use and history 2115-1989 ACLU demands spur alternatives in Hawaii juvenile system VoI.5/2/5-1990 Palmigiano judge urges alternatives VoI.6/2/5-1991 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Alternative programs that work ABA report urges sentencing, corrections reform VoI.6/312-1991 Vol. 7/3/1-1992 AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ABA report urges sentencing, corrections reform VoI.7/3/1-1992 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION ACLU opens death penalty centers in South ACLU opens Women Prisoners' Rights Project ACLU of Montana inspects Montana jails ACLU's Rights ofPrisoners revised Death penalty lawyers accept ACLU award 717-1986 7/10-1986 10/9-1986 15/14-1988 VoI.6/4I1-1991 AMERICAN CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION ACA asked to ease housing standards NPP denounces ACA stance on brutality question ACA votes to ease housing standards ARIAS V. WAINWRIGHT NPP case challenges conditions in Florida jails VoI.6/3/14-1991 VoI.7/1/5-1992 VoI.7Il/5-1992 3/1-1985 ARIZONA Parties move toward settlement in Black Revived settlement halts trial in Black Alighter view of the Arizona case 1/3-1984 5/4-1985 5/5-1985 ATtICA Remembering the Attica uprising NPP lawyer's work rooted in Attica Twenty years after Attica 13/5-1987 16/12-1988 VoI.6/4I17-1991 Vol. 712/12-1992 Vo1.9I4I17-1994 AUTHORS Adams, Stuart "Louisiana Death Row Gains Greater Legal Access" VoI.612/15-1991 "Vestiges of Slavery: Racism in Sentencing" 2112-1984 "Bureau Continues Totalitarian Measures at Marion" 5/8-1985 ";..rpp Goes Beyond Litigation in Pennsylvania" VoI.712/12-1992 Alexander, Elizabeth "Justice Department Retreats: The Michigan Case" 1/1-1984 "Judge Halts Meddling with Access to Clients" 312-1985 "Violations in South Dakota Prison Lead to Lawsuit" 416-1985 "C.s. v. Michigan.' An Update from the Battlefield" 1218-1987 "Prisoners' Lawyers Face Critical Issues" 13122-1987 "Can Contract Care Cure Prison Health Ailments?" 2215-1990 "Proving 'Deliberate Indifference' in the Wake of Wilson v. Seiter" Vo1.6/4I3-1991 Andersen, Erik 6/8-1985 Bagdikian, Ben H. "Media Treat Crimes As Isolated, Random Events" 13/31-1987 Baird, Katy "Death Penalty Law Still Tolerates Inequities" 1418-1987 Barbaret, Rosemary "Political Fallout Means Fewer Furloughs" 19/10-1989 Barry, Ellen "Imprisoned Mothers Face Extra Hardships" 1411-1987 Bell,James "Kids in Adult Jails: Still a Problem in 1990" THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL 1/8-1984 2110-1984 5/5-1985 8/10-1986 11/13-1987 13/35-1987 16/12-1988 20/9-1989 VoI.5/3/16-1990 VoI.6/4I14-1991 VoI.7/1/5-1992 VoI.7/3/1-1992 Berzins, Lorraine "Is Legal Punishment Right? The Answer is No" VoI.812/17-1993 Bonnyman, Gordon "Recent Federal Court Orders Spur Tennessee Toward Prison Reform" "Reform Advances in Tennessee After Decades of Brutality" 8/1-1986 VoI.8/4I1-1993 "Case Law Report" 21/9-1989,2219-1990, Vols. 5/219-1990, 5/3/10-1990,5/419-1990,6/1/6-1991,6/216-1991,6/3/6-1991, 6/416-1991,7/1/6-1992,7/216-1992,7/3/6-1992,7/416-1992, 8/1/12-1993,812/8-1993,8/317-1993,8/417-1993,9/1/13-1994, 91217-1994, 9/3/6-1994, 91416-1994, 10/1/6-1995, 101217-1995, 10/3/5 -1995 Brantley, Robert 1. (with Olinda Moyd) Aiyetoro, Adjoa A. "Denmark's Radical Approach to Super-Max Yields Success" "How Some Folks Do It In the Lone Star State" "Chock Full of Nuts" "How the West Was Won, Part II" "Hold Your Nose! NPP Examines the Diet Loaf' "Fourth Circuit Upholds Lower Court Order in South Carolina" "Another Day, Another Dead Roach In the Mail" "NPP Lawyer Ed Koren: Attica Started It All" "Dramatic Rise in Numbers of Elderly Prisoners Means Special Care, Increased Costs" "Early Prison Reforms Give Way to Present-Day Crowding" "NPP Lawyer Discusses Wilson, Legal Trends" "NPP Denounces ACA's Failure to Back Use of Force Standards" "ABA Report Urges Reform in Sentencing, Corrections" Boston, John AUSTIN V. LEHMAN Community coalition boosts PA litigation Agreement reached in statewide PA case Bernat, Betsy Vol. 512/6-1990 '''Tomorrow's Neighbors' Celebrate NAACP Inmate Chapter" 18/13-1989 Breed, Allen "Special Masters: Debate Needed on Role of Masters in Litigation" 13/15-1987 Bright, Stephen B. ''Judicial System Inconsistent in Doling Out Death" "ACLU Awards Medal of Liberty to Bryan Stevenson, Stephen Bright" 6/12-1985 Vo1.6/4I1-1991 Bronstein, Alvin J. "Opening Remarks" 112-1984 "Court Says Hands Off on Contact Visits and Cell Privacy" 1/9-1984 "The Legal Implications of Privatization" 2/1-1984 "Rhode Island Prisons Changing After Seven-Year Litigation Effort" 3/1-1985 "Super-Max Prisons Have Potential for Unnecessary Pain and Suffering" 411-1985 "Neglect of Prisons Reaps High Costs for Society" 7/12-1986 "Sweeping New Order in Rhode Island Case Promises Further Relief" 8/5-1986 "15 Years of Prison Litigation: What Has It Accomplished?" 11/6-1987 "Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Brutality Case" VoI.6/3/1-1991 "U.S. Policies Create Prison Human Rights Violations" Vo1.6/3/4-1991 "High Court Hands Down Prisoners' Rights Victory in Beating Case" VoI.7/2I1-1992 "No Equal Justice Under the Law in India orthe U,S." VoI.9/3/1-1994 SUMMER 1995 17 "Bill Seeks to Stop Courts From Protecting Basic Rights" (with Chase Riveland) VoU0/2/4-1995 Burns, Haywood "Remembering Attica" 13/5-1987 Burr, Richard "Book Review: Death Work: A Stud)' ofthe Modem Execution Process by Robert Johnson" VoI.5/3/l6-1990 Cade,Julia "No More QUick Options for District of Columbia" "Lack of Resources No Defense for Constitutional Violations" "ABA Funds Death Penalty Project" "Prisoners With AIDS in New York Live Half as Long as Those on Outside" (with Jan Elvin) "Machine Administers Fatal Injection" "Court Denounces Practices at Lexington Control Unit" "NPP Status Report: The Courts and the Prisons" (1990) 11/13-1987 ll/14-1987 12/8-1987 1517-1988 17/4-1988 17/l9-1988 2217-1990 "Billing Prisoners for Medical Care Blocks Access" (with Mark Lopez) Vol.9!1/1-1994 Cheney, Catherine Vol. 7/3/l5-1992 Clements, Carl B. "How to Evaluate Offender Needs Assessment" 18/l-1989 Cohen, Robert L., M.D. 6/5-1985 Conrad, John "An Expert Reflects on the Changing Face of 8/12-1986 Prison Litigation" Courlander, Michael (with David E. Tracey) VoI.6/1/16-1988 Curtis, Dennis 13/21-1987 Dolby, J.D. (with Kathi S. Westcott) VoU 0/2/6-1986 Dorsey, L.C. "The Death Penalty is Still Wrong" 3/8-1985 Dubler, Nancy "Medical Care: Past and Future" 13/29-1987 Elvin,Jan "Private Firms Cash in on Crime" 1/6-1984 "Private Prison Plans Dropped by Buckingham" 6/11-1985 "Florida Death Penalty Appeals Office Opens" 7/1-1986 "Oklahoma Prisoner Earns Place in History: The 10/1-1986 Story of Battle v. Anderson" 12/l-1987 "Where Are The Lawyers?" "NPP Celebrates 15 Years with Memories of Past, 14/l1-1987 Hope for Future" "Prisoners With AIDS in New York Live Half as Long as Those on Outside" (with Julia Cade) 1517-1988 "Washington State's Prisoner Numbers Stabilize as National Rate Soars" 19/1-1989 "Doubts Raised in Virginia Death Row Prisoner Case" 22/1-1990 "Adjoa Aiyetoro: Political Activist" Vol. 5/4/3-1990 "U.S. Now Leads World in Rate of Incarceration" VoI.6/l/1-1991 18 SUMMER 1995 VoI.7/l/1-1992 Vol. 7/3/3-1992 Vol. 7/3/l7-1992 VoI.7/4I5-1992 VoI.8/3/l-1993 VoI.8/3/l4-1993 VoI.9/3/3-1993 VoU 0/1/1-1994 VoU 0/2/5-1994 "The Lost Meaning of Whitley v. Albers" (with Mark Lopez) "U.S. Punishes Political Dissidents" Interview with Alvin J. Bronstein "Modification of Consent Decrees Goes to High Court" VoI.5/3/3 -1990 VoI.5/4/6-1990 VoI.6/2/1-1991 VoI.6/3/17-1991 Flittie, Roger G. "The Class Representative: APersonal Experience" 13/l9-1987 "AIDS Project Presses for Programs Behind Walls" VoI.6/l/3-1991 Gainsborough, Jenni "Funding For People, Not Prisons" "NPP Hosts Litigation Conference" "Agreement Reached in Statewide Pennsylvania Case" "Court Decides Landmark Class Action Case in Favor of Pelican Bay Prisoners" VoI.8/4/l7-1993 Vol.9!3/5-1994 VoI.9/4I17-1994 VoUO/1/13-1995 Geballe, Shelley (with Martha Stone) "The Reform of Federal Sentencing and Parole Laws" "An Anlysis of Drug Testing in Prison" VoI.6/4I12-1991 Freeman, Alexa (with Judy Greenspan) "Medical Expert Views Potential for Abuse in AIDS Screening" "Third Party Supervision Bolsters Probation Programs" VoI.6/l/14-1991 Fathi, David Chayriques, Kara "Crowded Prisons and Jails Unable to Meet Needs of Mentally Ill" (with Mark Lopez) "Judge Orders Changes at Virginia Penitentiary" "Prisoners Need Protection From Environmental Hazards" "TB Comes Back, Poses Special Threat to Jails, Prisons" "Citizens Protest Taking of Farmland for Federal Prison Site" "Film Review: 'Cancelled Lives'" "Isolation, Excessive Force Under Attack at California's Supermax" "Liberian Lawyer 'Always Knew' He Would Be Thrown in Jail" "Reflections on Lucasville: Have We Learned Anything Yet?" "Agreement Reached in Rhode Island Prison Case After 17 Years" "Corrections-Industrial Complex" Expands in l.S." "'Three Strikes' Law Won't Reduce Crime" "The New Focus on Medical Care Issues in Women's Prison Cases" 15/1-1988 Giarratano,Joseph "Prison Reform Viewed From the Inside" "Book Review: Last Rights: Thirteen Fatal Encounters with the State's Justice, by Joseph B. Ingle" 13/l8-1987 VoI.5/4/25-1990 Glasser, Ira "Bronstein Leaves NPP But Not Human Rights Work" VoU 0/3/1-1995 Goering, Susan (with Claudia Wright) "Maryland: Litigation Can Stop Unnecessary Jail Building" 18/l1-1989 Goldberg, Judy (with Nadine Marsh) "Ex-Offenders Find Doors Closed On Voting Rights" 3/3-1985 Goldstein, David B. "Supreme Court Summary" 1416-1987 Gostin, Larry "AIDS in Prison: AIDS Policies Raise Civil Liberties Concerns" 10/l0-1986 Green, Alice P. "Black Prisoners Organize for Self-Empowerment" Vol.9!I/l-1986 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Keating Jr., J. Michael Greenspan, Judy 16/5-1988 "NPP Gathers Statistics on AIDS in Prison" "Minnesota's Newest Prison Provides Humane Environment" 17116-1988 AIDS Update 19/13-1989,20114-1989,21114-1989,22118-1990, Vols. 5/2117-1990, 5/3118-1990, 5/4/26-1990,6/1118-1991, 6/2/18-1991,6/3/18-1991,6/4/18-1991,711/21-1992 "AIDS Project Presses for Programs Behind Walls" (with Alexa Freeman) Vo1.611/3-1991 '''Infamous Punishment': The Psycholocigal Consequences of Isolation" VoI.8/2/3-1993 Harrell, William C. "Cuban Detainees Face Further Frustration, Unfair Treatment" 17/24-1988 Kluger, Mark "South Carolina Settlement Limits Population, Enforces Standards" 5/1-1985 "Strategies For Future Prison Litigation" "Monitoring Committee on Prisons in Alabama Folds' Court Gives Up Jurisdiction" ' 2/1-1984 20/1-1989 Koren, Edward I. "ASCA Proposes Watering Down of SingleCeIling Standards" Vo1.6/3114-1991 Harris, M. Kay "Exploring the Connections Between Feminism and Justice" 13/33-1987 Hauhart, Robert "D.C. Public Defender Works to Defned Prisoner Rights" Vo1.8/1119-1986 "Dramatic Change in Oklahoma Juvenile Justice Svstem" 213-1984 "Status Report: State Prisons and the Courts- ' Vo1.711113-1992 January 1, 1992" "Status Report: State Prisons and the CourtsVo1.811/3-1993 January 1, 1993" "Status Report: State Prisons and the CourtsVo1.91113-1994 January 1, 1994" Lancaster, Jennie "Corrections Staff Are 'Silent Actors' in Executions" Immarigeon, Russ "Community Service Sentences Pose Problems, 10/13-1986 Show Potential" "Women in Prison: Is Locking Them Up the 1111-1987 Only Answer?" "Few Diversion Programs Offered Female Offenders" 1219-1987 "Victim and Offender Participation Important to Criminal Sentencing Process" 14/9-1987 "Critics Urge Caution in Interpreting Justice 15/10-1988 Department Study" "Despite New Laws, Juveniles Still Locked in 17/21-1988 Adult Jails" "Sentencing: Guidelines and Planning Services Foster Wider Use of Alternatives" 18/1-1989 "Four States Study Policies Affecting Women Offenders" 19/4-1989 "Electronic Monitoring: Humane Alternative or Just Another 'Gizmo'?" 2115-1989 "Instead of Death: Alternatives to Capital Punishment" Vol. 5/3/6-1990 "Book Review: Last One Over the Wall: The Massachusetts Experiment in Closing Reform School, by Jerome Miller" Vo1.71116-1992 VoI.7/4/1-1992 Vol. 9/415-1994 "The Marionization of American Prisons" "When Parents Are Sent to Prison" Janger, Ted 17/6-1988 Lasker, Judge Morris E. "The Tombs, On Reflection: Prison Litigation: Many Years Toward Compliance" 1119-1987 Levine, Jody "Private Prison Planned on Toxic Waste Site" 5/10-1985 Lindsay, Margot C. "Citizen Involvement Can Play Key Role in Corrections" 20/12-1989 Lopez, Mark J. "Decisions in Safley and O'Lone Undo Years of Progress" 15/8-1988 "New Mexico Seeks to Elude Obligations of 16/1-1988 Consent Decree" "Forced Drugging of Mentally III Prisoners" 1917-1989 "Court Fines Rhode Island Officials Over 2111-1989 Non-Compliance" "The Lost Meaning of Whitley v. Albers" Vo1.5/3/3-1990 (with David Fathi) "Reactivated New Orleans Jail Case Uncovers Same Old Problems, Divisions" Vol.712/4-1992 "Crowded Prisons and Jails Unable to Meet Needs of Mentally Ill" (with Catherine Cheney) VoI.7/3/15-1992 "Billing Prisoners for Medical Care Blocks Access" VoI.9/111-1994 (with Kara Chayriques) Macallair, Dan "Expert Negotiation Brings New Approach to Prison Litigation in Hawaii" 6/6-1985 Janusz,Luke "Odyssey: APrison Magazine's Difficult Journey" Vo1.8/111-1993 Jones, Mohamedu, F. "ACLU's Demands Trigger Change in Hawaii's Juvenile Svstem" Vol. 5/215-1990 Marnell, Gunnar "Swedes See U.S. Death Penalty as Premeditated Killing" 4/9-1985 Marsh, Nadine (with Judy Goldberg) "U.S. Fails to Conform to International Human Rights Tenets" Vo1.8/4/5-1993 "Ex-Offenders Find Doors Closed on Voting Rights" 3/3-1985 Martino, Maria Jurado, Rebecca "California Project Stands Up For Women in Prison" 7/10-1986 Khan, Ayesha THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Keller, O.J. Knowles, Ralph Haney, Craig "Bill Seeks to Strip Courts of Power in Prison Cases" Vol. 5/4/1-1990 "How to Work With Special Masters" Vo1.1011l14-1995 "Georgia Study Reveals Racial Bias in Sentencing" "Seven Alternatives Punishment Programs That Work" 20/8-1989 VoI.6/3/2-1991 McClymont, Mary E. "Prison Litigation: Making Reform a Reality, Part I" "Prison Litigation... , Part II" 1/8-1984 214-1984 SUMMER 1995 19 "Hard-Fought Selliement Reached in Hawaii Case" "Execution for Juvenile Crime Raises Questions of International Law" 'Jerry M.: Settlement Reached in Juvenile Case" 5/3-1985 7/13-1986 10/12-1986 McKinlay, Peter "Good Staff-Prisoner Relations Key to Success of Scotland's Supermax" Vo1.7/4I22-1986 "Health Professionals and a Preventable Death at Butner" 16/9-1988 Millemann, Michael Monahan, Jennifer VoI.8/1/1-1993 Vol.1 0/1/4-1995 Morris, Stephanie (with Nick Straley) VoI.9/4/2-1994 Morton, Chuck Moyd, Olinda (with Robert L. Brantley) "'Tomorrow's Neighbors' Celebrate NAACP Inmate Chapter" 18/13-1989 Mushlin, Michael B. "Rhodes v. Chapman Analyzed for Effect on Prison Overcrowding" 14/4-1987 Myers, Matthew L. "The Alabama Case: 12 Years After james v. Wallace" 13/8-1987 Nagel, William G. 13/13-1987 Nathan, Stephen VoI.10/3/4-1995 Nathan, Vincent 13/16-1987 Ney, Steven "Statewide Allack on Florida Jails Brings Improvement" "Judge Bans Further Intake of Prisoners at D.C. Jail" "D.C. Pushes Panic Bullon in Jail Population Crisis" 3/1-1985 5/6-1985 8/8-1986 11/10-1987 17/8-1988 Pettine, Hon. RaymondJ. VoI.6/215-1991 20 SUMMER 1995 17/3-1988 Stone, Martha (with Shelley Geballe) "The New Focus on Medical Care Issues in Women's Prison Cases" 15/1-1988 Stevenson, Bryan "ACLU Awards Medal of Liberty to Bryan Stevenson, Stephen Bright" VoI.6/4/1-1991 Straley, Nick (with Stephanie Morris) "New Legal Standard Set on Religious Rights of Prisoners" Vol.914/2-1994 Sturm, Susan 6/9-1985 Taifa, Nkechi "Muslims in Prison Seek Religious Recognition" "Mandatory Minimum Sentences Open Up a Pandora's Box" 8/3-1986 VoI.8/3/3-1993 "Doctors' Involvement in Death Penalty Creates Ethical Dilemma" 1712-1988 Tracey, David E. (with Michael Courlander) "Third Party Supervision Bolsters Probation Programs" VoI.6/1/16-1991 817-1986 Tushnet, Rebecca VoI.5/2/15-1990 Vaid, Urvashi "Depo-Provera: Blessing or Curse?" "NPP Gathers the Facts on AIDS in Prison" "Balanced Response Needed to AIDS in Prison" 411-1985 6/1-1985 7/1-1986 Verstraete, Greye 10/9-1986 Walker, Jackie Vol. 5/3/1-1990 Resnik, Judith "The Limits of Parity in Prison" Vol.1 0/2/1-1995 Start, Armond, M.D. "Jail Inspections Trigger Improvements" Presser, Stefan "In Pennsylvania, 200 Years of Practice Doesn't Make Perfect" 13/5-1987 Smith, Jonathan M. "Resolved: High Schoolers Should Debate Prison Overcrowding" Ortega, Nancy "Rhode Island Judge Reflects on Palmigiano" "Prisoners' Rights Lawyers in VA and NY Merge to Form NPP" "Supreme Court Briefs" VoI.5/2/1-1985 Ogletree, Charles J. "AIDS Policy Tested in Alabama Prison Case" Schwartz, Herman Tushnet, Mark Novick, Steven A. "Book Review: The Myth ofa Racist Criminal justice System, by William Wilbanks" VoI.8/4/14-1993 Thorburn, M.D., Kim Marie "Lawsuits Fundamental to Prison Reform" "Bitter Legal Combat Leads Oklahoma Out of Dark Ages in Care of Juveniles" voI.10/2/4-1995 Schmidt, Esther and Franklin "Special Masters Aid in Compliance Efforts" "Reflections of an Expert Witness" "U.S. Companies Expand Corrections Market to Overseas" "Bill Seeks to Stop Courts From Protecting Basic Rights" "Nor Will I Prescribe a Deadly Drug... " VoI.5/2/15-1990 1/12-1984 Riveland, Chase (with Alvin J. Bronstein) "Spread of TB Poses Danger to Prisoners and Staff" "New Legal Standard Set on Religious Rights of Prisoners" 12/12-1987 Rosenthal, Liz "Virginia Prisoners Take Steps to Shun Violence" "VA Prisoners Find Advocates in Early Prison Reformers" 13/3-1987 "Resolved: High Schoolers Should Debate Prison Overcrowding" "Weighing Privilege to Smoke Against Rights of Non-Smokers" "Tax Reform Package Caught in Catch-22" Miles, M.D., Steven H. "Moscow Prison Conference Breaks New Ground" "PRI Members Confer on UN Prison Standards" Restrepo, L. Felipe 13/26-1987 AIDS Update Vols. 7/2/18-1992, 7/3/18-1992, 7/4/26-1992,8/1/22-1993,8/2/22-1993,8/3/18-1993, 8/4118-1993,9/1/22-1994,9/2/18-1994,9/3118-1994, 9/4118-1994,10/1/18-1995,10/2/18-1995,10/3/30-1995 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL Walker, Sam "The Beginning: Sixties Civil Rights Gave Momentum to Prisoners' Rights" 1312-1987 Westcott, Kathi S. (with J.D. Dolby) "An Anlysis of Drug Testing in Prison" VoU 012/6-1995 Vo1.9I4I1-1994 Wood, Frank "Oak Park Heights Sets High Super-Max Standards" 413-1985 Wright, Claudia "Parties Move Toward Settlement in Arizona" "Revived Settlement Halts Trial In Black" "Expert Witnesses: Expa~ding Their Role in Prison Cases" "Maryland: Litigation Can Stop Unnecessary jail Building" (with Susan Goering) 911-1986 17/19-1988 17124-1988 Vol.5/4I6-1990 Vol.7/3/3-1992 BUSH V. VITERNA Whitley, John "Crime Bill Guts Educational Programs" Cubans detained in Atlanta Penitentiary Court denounces Lexington Control Unit Cuban detainees suffering unfair treatment Political prisoners do exist in U.S. Citizens protest proposed prison Unusual practices found in Texas jails 1/8-1984 -cCALIFORNIA 1/3-1984 5/4-1985 13112-1987 18/11-1989 ACLU starts Women Prisoners' Rights Project Case against Pelican Bay supermax alleges excessive force Pyschological consequences of isolation at Pelican Bay Decision in Pelican Bay case (Madrid v. Gomez) 7110-1986 Vol.7/4I5-1992 Vol.812/3-19 VoU 011/13-1995 CALIFORNIA INSTITUTION FOR WOMEN -BBARAWINI V. MEESE Court denounces Lexington Control Unit Political prisoners do exist in U.S. 17/19-1988 Vol. 5/4/6-1990 BATES V. LYNN Case increases legal access on LA death row BA1TLE V. ANDERSON Looking back at Battle v. Anderson Vol.612/15-1991 1011-1986 BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION PROGRAMS Program challenged in Arizona prison AZ settlement addresses behavior modification 1/3-1984 5/4-1985 BEU V. WOLFISH Prisoners' lawyers face critical issues 13122-1987 Vol.91111-1994 1/3-1984 5/4-1985 Vol.6/211-1991 VoU 0/3/1-1995 312-1985 13118-1987 BRUTALIlY Circuit courts decide Huguet, Miller Vol.5/4II0CL-1990 Supreme Court to hear Hudson Vol.6/311-1991 NPP denounces ACA stance on brutality question Vol.7/1/5-1992 Supreme Court decides Hudson in prisoner's favor Vol. 7/2/1-1992 Impact of Hudson in use of force cases Vol.8/1/12-1993 Decision in Pelican Bay case (Madrid v. Gomez) VoUO/1/13-1995 BUREAU OF PRISONS Totalitarian conditions at Marion THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Searches issue in Block v. Rutherford Assessing offender needs COMPLIANCE BROWN V. MURRAY Lawyer access problems at Mecklenburg Inmate's view of prison reform, litigation Areview of recent federal court decisions affecting corrections and prisoners' rights 21/9-1989, 22/9-1990, Vol. 5/2/9-1990, 5/3/101990,5/4/9-1990,611/6-1991,6/2/6-1991,6/3/6-1991,6/4161991,711/6-1992,712/6-1992,7/3/6-1992,7/4/6-1992,811/121993,812/8-1993,8/317-1993,8/417-1993,911/13-1994,912171994, 9/3/6-1994, 91416-1994, 10/1/6-1995, 101217-19-1995, 10/3/ -1995 1/9-1984 BRONSTEIN, ALVINJ. Interview with NPP's Executive Director Bronstein to leave NPP 711-1986 12/6-1987 CASE LAW REPORT COMMUNIlY ACTIVISM BODY CAVIlY SEARCHES Searches challenged at AZ State Prison AZ settlement limits body cavity searches Florida opens capital appeals office CCR handles death penalty appeals 1/3-1984 5/4-1985 5/5-1985 BLOCK V. RUTHERFORD Supreme Court case re: search, visitation rights of detainees CAPITAL COLLATERAL REPRESENTATIVE (CCR) 1/9-1984 CLASSIFICATION BlACK V. RICKETrS Ad. seg. conditions challenged in AZ lawsuit Revived settlement halts Arizona trial Alighter look at Arizona case 7110-1986 1411-1987 15/1-1988 CELL SEARCHES BLACK PRISONERS Organizing for self-empowerment Conditions challenged by ACLU Imprisoned mothers face extra hardships Litigation targets medical care in women's prisons 5/8-1985 Citizen participation in corrections Coalition boosts Pennsylvania litigation Citizens protest proposed prison Making prison reform a reality (2 parts) Special masters aid in compliance judge discusses "Tombs" case Debating the role of special masters New Mexico falls short on compliance Alabama prison-monitoring committee folds Court fines Rhode Island on noncompliance Compliance a struggle in OK juvenile case 18/1-1989 20112-1989 Vol.7/2/12-1992 Vol.7/3/3-1992 1/8-1984,2/1-1984 6/9-1985 1119-1987 13115-1987 16/1-1988 2011-1989 21/1-1989 Vol. 51211-1990 CONGDON V. MURRAY judge orders changes at VA penitentiary Vol.6/1/14-1991 CONSENT DECREES NPP challenges decree in U.S. v. Michigan 1/1-1984 NPP's Status Report on the courts and the prisons 3110-1985,13124-1987,1817-1989,2217-1990, Vols.7/1/13-1992, 811/3-1993,9/1/3-1994,101115-1995 (summary only) SC decree limits population, enforces standards 511-1985 Consent decree entered in Hawaii 5/3-1985 Court orders SC to comply with decree 914-1986 Appeals court upholds pop. cap in South Carolina 11/13-1987 SUMMER 1995 21 New Mexico fails to comply with decree Supreme Court to review modification of consent decrees 16/1-1988 Vol.6/3/17-1991 CONTACT VISITS Visits for detainees issue in Block v. Rutherford 1/9-1984 CONTEMPT Making prison reform a reality 214-1984 CONRAD, JOHN P. In memory 8/1/93-1986 CORRECTIONS INDUSTRY Expansion of corrections-industrial complex in US U.S. companies extend corrections market overseas VoI.10/1/1-I995 Vol.6/3/6CL-1991 Vol.6/4I3-1991 VoI.6/4I6CL-1991 Vol.8/4I7CL-1993 Vol. 9!4I6CL-1994 DENMARK Danish super-max far cry from U.S. counterparts 6/8-1985 DEPO-PROVERA Depo-provera treatment raises questions 411-1985 Muslim prisoners seek right to religious diet 8/3-1986 DIET LOAF VoI.10/3/ -1995 9/6"1986 13/31-1987 15/10-1988 Vol.8/2/17-1993 Vol.8/4I17-1993 Vol. 9/2/3-1994 Vo1.9/3/1-1994 Vol. 10/215-1995 CUBAN DETAINEES Cubans detained in Atlanta penitentiary Cuban detainees suffering unfair treatment Proving deliberate indifference after Wilson Alook at post-Wilson decisions An analysis of Helling v. McKinney decision An analysis of Farmer v. Brennan decision DIET CRIMINAL JUSTICE Making sense of crime statistics Media promotes vicious criminal justice cycle Interpreting BJS public opinion study Legal punishment and justice Reducing crime - NCCD plan Responses to Berzins' argument against legal punishment Inequalities in justice systems worldwide Misguided 'Three Strikes' laws DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE An analysis of Wilson v. Seiter 9/1-1986 17/24-1988 "Diet loaf' challenged in Arizona case Arizona settlement outlaws "diet loaf" Alighter look at the diet loaf 1/3-1984 5/4-1985 8/10-1986 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Judge sets population cap at D.C. Jail D.C. panics over jail population crisis Settlement reached in D.C. juvenile case Alternatives only option for D.C. D.C. Public Defender's Prisoners' Rights Program 5/6-1985 8/8-1986 10/12-1986 11/13-1987 Vol.8/1/19-1993 DOUBLE-CELLING ACA asked to ease housing standards Supreme Court to review modification of consent decrees Is double-celling unconstitutional? Vol.6/3/14-1991 Vol.6/3/17-1991 Vol.7/3/13-1992 DUE PROCESS Supreme Court ruling in Sandin v. Conner -DDANIELS V. WILLIAMS Supreme Court deCides negligence case 817-1986 DEATH PENALTY Death penalty information packet Death penalty: a personal view Swedes confused by U.S. death penalty Courts inconsistent in issuing death penalty Florida opens capital appeals office Model offices for centralized capital appeals ACLU opens death penalty centers in South Jury override can backfire into death sentence Execution for juvenile crime challenged Serious shortage of death penalty lawyers Trial-level errors in capital cases Florida's CCR handles capital appeals ABA funds death penalty project Death penalty law tolerates inequities Executions pose ethical dilemma for doctors Doctors' role in executions New machine administers lethal injection Corrections staff "silent actors" in execution Is Virginia's Joe Giarratano innocent? Alternatives to the death penalty Richard Burr reviews Robert Johnson's Death Work Joseph Giarratano reviews Ingle's Last Rights Lawsuit increases legal access on LA death row Death penalty lawyers accept ACLU award 3/6-1985 3/8-1985 419-1985 6/12-1985 7/1-1986 7/6-1986 717-1986 7/8-1986 7113-1986 12/1-1987 1214-1987 1216-1987 1218-1987 1418-1987 1712-1988 17/3-1988 17/4-1988 17/6-1988 2211-1990 Vol. 5/3/6-1990 Vol.5/3/16-1990 Vol.5/4/25-1990 Vol.6/2I15-1991 Vol.6/4I1-1991 22 SUMMER 1995 Depo-provera treatment raises questions Forcing psychotropic drugs on mentally ill prisoners Drug testing in prison DURAN V. KING Budget cuts don't excuse violations, says court New Mexico falls short on compliance 411-1985 1917-1989 VoI.10/2I6-1995 11/14-1987 16/1-1988 -EEIGHTH AMENDMENT (also see "Litigation," "Overcrowding," and "Brutality") Courts stretch meaning of Whitley v. Albers Vol. 5/3/3-1990 An analysis of Wilson decision Vol.6/3/6CL-1991 Proving deliberate indifference after Wilson Vol.6/4I3-l991 An analysis of Helling v. McKinney decision Vol.8/4I7CL-1993 An analysis of Farmer v. Brennan decision Vol.9/3/6CL-1994 ELDERLY PRISONERS More elderly prisoners raises problems 20/9-1989 ELECTRONIC MONITORING Electronic monitoring in use and history 21/5-1989 ELISA TEST Use of ELISA test in prisons Medical expert on problems in AIDS screening AIDS screening policies and ELISA test 6/1-1985 6/5-1985 7/1-1986 ENVIRONMENT Environmental hazards threaten prisoners DELAWARE Delaware studying women offender policies VoI.10/3/ -1995 DRUGS Vol.6/4I12-1991 1914 -1989 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL Supreme Court ruling in Sandin v. Conner EXPERTS Expert panel negotiates settlement in Hawaii An expert's view of the Alabama case The expanding role of experts in prison cases Nagel: reflections of an expert witness 6/6-1985 8/l2-1986 13/l2-1987 13/l3-1987 -FFARMER V. BRENNAN An analysis of Supreme Court's decision VoI.9/4/5-1994 VoI.9/4/6CL-1994 FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS See BUREAU OF PRISONS The connections between feminism and justice 13/33-1987 FIRST AMENDMENT Prisoners' lawyers face critical issues Supreme Court decisions affect First Amendment rights Supreme Court decisions in O'Lone and Safley 13122-1987 14/6-1987 15/8-1988 4/6-1985 13/19-1987 3/1-1985 7/1-1986 1216-1987 Vol.l0/2/18-1995 19/10-1989 -GGEORGIA Study shows racial bias in sentencing 20/8-1989 GREAT BRITAIN Success of Barlinne Special Unit, Scotland's supermax GRUBBS V. BRADLEY Court orders spur reforms in Tennessee Special Master's role in Tennessee case End of Tennessee prison case Vol. 7/4/22-1986 8/1-1986 8/2-1986 VoI.8/4I1-1993 -HHAMILTON V. MORIAL New Orleans jail case plagued by old problems Vol. 7/2/4-1992 HAMMETT, THEODORE Interview with author of annual Update to HIVIAIDS ill Correctional Facilities VoI.9/3I18-1994 HANDGUNS Canadian gun control legislation studied HARRIS V. THIGPEN Alabama case challenges AIDS policies THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL HUDSON v. MCMILLIAN Supreme Court to hear brutality case VoI.6/3/1-1991 NPP denounces ACA's stance on brutality question VoI.7/l15-1992 Supreme Court decides Hudson in prisoner's favor Vol. 7/2/1-1992 An analysis of Hudson decision VoI.7/2/6CL-1992 ILLINOIS Lockdown at Marion investigated Illinois studying women offender policies 5/8-1985 19/4-1989 INCARCERATION RATES l.S. has world's highest incarceration rate VoI.6/1/l-1991 Moscow Prison Conference, November 1992 [S Legal Standard Conflicts with International Covenants Inequalities in justice systems worldwide Penal Reform International conference on UN prison standards VoI.8/2/1-1993 VoI.8/4/5-1993 VoI.9/3/1-1994 Vol.l 0/l/4-1995 JAILS National jail Project of ACLU underway 1/1-1984 Unusual practices in Texas jails 1/8-1984 Detainee rights at issue in Block v. Rutherford 1/9-1984 Women in jails have special problems 2/9-1984 Arias v. Wainwright challenges Florida jails 3/l-1985 jail Coalition information packets 3/9-1985,412-1985 jail Coalition reorganizes 412-1985 judge sets population cap at D.C. jail 5/6-1985 .'iational jail Project releases jail Status Report 5/12-1985 D.C. panics over jail population crisis 8/8-1986 ACLU inspects Montana jails 10/9-1986 NIC studies jail suicides 11/12-1987 Agreement reached in Maryland jail case 15/13-1988 Removing juveniles from adult jails 17121-1988 MD jail litigation encourages alternatives 18/11-1989 jail suicide study released 18/l4-1989 Many juveniles still detained in adult jails Vol. 5/2/6-1990 New Orleans jail case plagued by old problems Vol. 7/2/4-1992 jails failing mentally ill VoI.7/3/l5-1992 JERRY M. V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Settlement reached in D.C. juvenile case 1O/l2-1986 JONES, MOHAMEDU F. 19/14-1989 Interview with NPP lawyer VoI.8/3/l-1993 JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 17/8-1988 NPP challenges consent decree in Michigan An update on the Michigan case HAWAII Settlement reached in Spear v. Ariyoshi Expert panel negotiates settlement in Hawaii ACLU demands bring change in Hawaii juvenile system 15/l3-1988 -J- FURLOUGHS Presidential campaign impacts furloughs HENDRICKSON V. WELCH Agreement reached in Maryland jail case INTERNATIONAL HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS FLORIDA NPP files suit against Florida jails Florida opens capital appeals office Florida's CCR handles capital appeals Florida AIDS Care Unit VoI.8/4I7CL-1993 -I- FEMINISM FL/lTIE V. HILlARD NPP lawsuit filed in South Dakota Inmate's experience as a class representative HEllING V. MCKINNEY Analysis of Helling v. McKinney decision HIV VIRUS (See AIDS AND HIV VIRUS) FAMILIES New York programs for incarcerated parents Vol.l0/3/ -1995 5/3-1985 6/6-1985 VoI.5/2/5-1985 Attorney General Barr holds "Corrections Summit" JUVENILES Terry'D. v. Rader challenges OK juvenile system Execution for juvenile crime challenged 1/1-1984 12/8-1987 Vol. 7/2/3-1992 2/3-1984 7/12-1986 SUMMER 1995 23 T Settlement reached in D.C. juvenile case Removing juveniles from adult jails Case brings reforms to OK juvenile system ACLU demands change Hawaii juvenile system Many juveniles still detained in adult jails Juvenile rights: significant cases Forum held on minority youth incarceration rates High number of girls held as status offenders NCCD reports on community sanctions for juveniles Book review: Jerome Miller's Last One Over the Wall Film review: "Cancelled Lives" 10/12-1986 17121-1989 Vol. 5/2/1-1990 Vol.5/2/5-1990 Vol. 5/2/6-1990 Vol.5/217-1990 Vol.5/2/17-1990 Vol. 5/2/18-1990 Vol.5/2/18-1990 VoI.7/2/16-1992 Vol. 7/3/17-1992 ·K· KOREN, EDWARD I. NPP lawyer discusses 18 years in prisoners' rights 16/12-1988 ·L· LEGAL ACCESS (See ACCESS TO THE COURTS) LEGISLATION Texas legislature writes prison reform package The Religious Freedom Restoration Act Crime Bill ends Pell grants for prisoners STOP legislation in Congress Impact of STOP legislation Misguided 'Three Strikes' laws LETHAL INJECTION Executions pose ethical dilemma for doctors Doctors' role in executions New machine can administer lethal injection LEWISBURG PRISON PROJECT LPP distributes booklets 1/12-1984 VoI.9/1/13CL-1994 Vol.9/4I1-1994 Vo1.10/1/14-1995 Vo1.10/2/4-1995 Vo1.10/2/5-1995 17/2-1988 17/3-1988 17/4-1988 12/15-1987 LEXINGTON (KY) FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION Court denounces Lexington Control Unit 17/19-1988 Political prisoners do exist in U.S. Vol. 5/4/6-1990 LITIGATION Highlights of NPP's litigation2/9-1984, 3/12-1985, 4/12-1985,5/121985,6/16-1985,7/16-1986,8/14-1986,9/16-1986,10/16-1986, ll/16-1987, 12/16-1987, 14/16-1987, 15/16-1988, 16/16-1988, 17/28-1988,18/16-1989,19/16-1989,20/16-1989,21/16-1989, 22/20-1990, Vols. 5/2/20-1990, 5/3/20-1990, 5/4/28-1990, 6/1/20-1991,6/2/20-1991,6/3/20-1991,6/4/20-1991,7/1/241992,712/20-1992,7/3/20-1992,7/4/28-1992,8/1/24-1993, 8/2/24-1993,8/3/20-1993,8/4120-1993,9/1/24-1994,9/2/201994,9/3/20-1994,9/4/20-1994, 10/1/20-1995, 10/2/20-1995, 10/3/32-1995 NPP's Status Report on the courts and the prisons 3/10-1985,13/24-1987,1817-1989,2217-1990, Vols.7/1/13-1992, 8/1/3-1993, 9/1/3-1994, 10/1/5-1995 (summary only) Strategies for future prison litigation (2 parts) 1/8-1984,2/1-1984 Expert reflects on prison litigation 8/12-1986 Evaluating 15 years of prison litigation 11/6-1987 Judge discusses "Tombs" litigation 11/9-1987 Judicial commentary on prison cases 13/2-1987 Civil rights movement a catalyst for prisoners' rights 13/2-1987 The expanding role of experts in prison cases 13/12-1987 Lawsuits fundamental to prison reform 13/16-1987 An inmate's view of prison litigation 13/18-1987 Inmate's experience as class representative 13/19-1987 ") A ('111H.4[:0 100.'; Litigation increasingly costly, complex 13/22-1987 15 years of prison litigation: a timeline 13/26-1987 Alabama prison-monitoring committee folds 20/1-1989 Courts stretch meaning of Whitley v. Albers Vol. 5/3/3-1990 Judge orders changes at VA penitentiary Vol.6/1/14-1991 An analysis of Wilson decision VoI.6/3/6CL-1991 Proving deliberate indifference after Wilson Vol. 6/4/3-1991 Alook at post-Wilson decisions Vol.6/4/6CL-1991 New Orleans jail case plagued by old problems Vol. 7/2/4-1992 Can a prisoner file a class action? Vol. 7/4/25-1992 Due process theory of "liberty interests" Vol.8/2/8CL-1993 Resjudicata or collateral estoppel? VoI.8/2/16-1993 How do I serve a pro se complaint? Vol.8/3/17-1993 An analysis of Helling v. McKinney decision Vol.8/4I7CL-1993 What is a motion for summary judgment? VoI.8/4I13-1993 What is discovery? Vol.9/1/21-1994 An analysis of Farmer v. Brennan decision VoI.9/3/6CL-1994 Can women prisoners sue over sex discrimination? Vol.9/3/13-1994 Litigation under RFRA Vol.9/4/2-1994 Criminal contempt - Supreme Court decision in Bagwell Vol.9/4I6CL-1994 Analysis of Pelican Bay decision (Madrid v. Gomez) 10/2I7CL-1995 LOUISIANA Lawsuit increases legal access on death row Supreme Court to hear brutality case (Hudson) Supreme Court decides brutality case in prisoner's favor New Orleans jail case plagued by old problems Vol.6/2/15-1991 Vol.6/3/1-1991 VoI.7I2/1-1992 Vol. 7/2/4-1992 ·M· MADRID V. GOMEZ Case against Pelican Bay supermax alleges excessive force Decision in Pelican Bay case Analysis of Pelican Bay decision MAGNER,jIM In memory Vol. 7/4/5-1986 Vo1.10/1/13-1995 Vol. I0I2I7CL-1995 VoI.9/4/18-1995 MAGID, JUDITH In memory 5/2-1985 MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES Harm done by mandatory minimums MARION, ILLINOIS, U.S. PENITENTIARY Lockdown at Marion investigated Examining supermax prisons MARRIAGE Supreme Court strikes down maFfiage restrictions MARYLAND Agreement reached in Maryland jail case Jail litigation encourages alternatives NAACP established at Maryland Penitentiary Maryland studying women offender policies VoI.8/3/3-1993 5/8-1985 411-1985 14/6-1987 15/13-1988 18/11-1989 18/13-1989 19/4 -1989 MASSACHUSETTS Massachusetts studying women offender policies Book review: Jerome Miller's Last One Over the Wall MCI-Framingham's infectious disease clinic Vol.7/2/16-1992 Vo1.10/3/ -1995 MAXIMUM SECURIlY PRISONS Examining supermax prisons Minnesota facility sets high supermax standards 411-1985 4/3-1985 19/4-1989 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNA Lockdown investigated at Marion Danish supermax differs from U.S. counterparts Court denounces FCI-Lexington Control Unit U.S. prisons violate human rights The spread of supermax control units modeled on Marion Conditions at Pelican Bay supermax challenged Success of Barlinnie Special Unit, Scotland's supermax 5/8-1985 6/8-1985 17/19-1988 Vo1.6/3/4-1991 VoI.7/4I1-1992 VoI.7/4I5-1992 Vo1.7/4I22-1992 MEDIA Media promotes vicious criminal justice cycle 13/31-1987 MEDICAL CARE See also: AIDS and TUBERCULOSIS NCCHC publishes healt~ care standards 11112-1987 Correctional health care: past and future 13129-1987 Imprisoned mothers face extra hardships 1411-1987 Litigation targets medical care in women's prisons 15/1-1988 Health professionals and the mistreatment of prisoners 16/9-1988 Executions pose ethical dilemma for doctors 1712-1988 Doctors' role in executions 17/3-1988 Machine can administer lethal injection 17/4-1988 Contract medical care generates concerns 22/5-1990 Courts differ on medical care standard VoI.5/4II0CL-1990 TB poses threat to prisoners VoI.7/1/1-1992 Prison health care in crisis Vol. 7/3/14-1992 Billing prisoners for medical care VoI.912/1-1994 Dangers posed by spread of TB VoI.1012/1-1995 PA agreement to improve medical care Vo1.9I4I17-1994 MENTAL HEALTH CARE Forcing psychotropic drugs on mentally ill prisoners Prisons, jails failing mentally ill Psychological consequences of isolation 1917-1989 Vol. 7/3/15-1992 VoI.8/2/3-1993 MICHIGAN NPP challenges consent decree in Michigan An update on the Michigan case 1/1-1984 12/8-1987 MINNESOTA Oak Park Heights sets high supermax standard Minnesota women's prison is humane 4/3-1985 17/16-1988 10/9-1986 7/13-1986 Muslims prisoners seek religious recognition 8/3-1986 Supreme Court decides O'Lone v. Estate a/Shabazz 1416-1987 Effects of Supreme Court decision in O'Lone 15/8-1988 Post-Shabazz decisions on religious rights VoI.5/4I9-1990 .N· NATION OF ISLAM See: MUSLIMS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE AD VANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP) 18/13-1989 NATIONAL COALITION FOR JAIL REFORM Information packets available 'lion reorganizes . g juveniles from adult jails NATIONAL COUNCIL ON CRIME AND DELINQUENCY NCCD plan to reduce crime VoI.8/4/17-1993 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CORRECTIONS NIC to study jail suicides NIC publishes "Research in Corrections" series 11/12-1987 16/14-1988 NATIONAL JAIL PROJECT OF THE ACLU National Jail Project of the ACLU underway Jail Project releases Jail Status Report 1/1-1984 5/12-1985 NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT OF THE ACLU NPP's Status Report on the courts and the prisons 3/10-1985,13124-1987,1817-1989,2217-1990, Vols. 7/1/13-1992, 8/1/3-1993, 911/3-1994, 10/1/5-1995 (summary only) New brochure on NPP available 10/16-1986 NPP staff changes 11112-1987,12113-1987,14114-1987,16/14-1988 NPP establishes AIDS Project 11/16-1987 NPP releases AIDS Bibliography 12/13-1987 Civil rights movement a catalyst for prisoners' rights 13/2-1987 The founding of the NPP 13/5-1987 Who are the NPP staff lawyers? 13/12-1987 NPP law interns recall favorite moments 13/14-1987 Catching up with former interns 13/30-1987 NPP staff, past and present 13/34-1987 Inside look at the Prison Project 13/35-1987 NPP marks 15 years with conference, celebration 14111-1987 Interview with NPP's Edward Koren 16/12-1988 ACLU's The Rights of Prisoners revised 15/14-1988 Bronstein wins MacArthur Award 21/14-1989 Profile of NPP's Adjoa Aiyetoro Vol. 5/4/3-1990 Interview with NPP's Alvin Bronstein VoI.612/1-1991 Interview with NPP's Elizabeth Alexander VoI.6/4I14-1991 Results of NPP Journal readers' survey Vol. 7/1/12-1992 NPP releases TB booklet VoI.8/1/17-1993 Interview with NPP's Mohamedu Jones VoI.8/3/1-1993 NPP litigation conference VoI.9/3/5-1994 Post-Shabazz decisions on religious rights Vol. 5/419-1990 Supreme Court decides Daniels and Davidson 817-1986 NELSON V. LEEKE MUSLIMS Branch established at Maryland Penitentiary VoI.6/3/17-1991 NEGLIGENCE MOUNDSVILLE, WEST VIRGINIA PENITENTIARY Conditions spark disturbance VoI.6/1/5-1991 NATIVE AMERICANS MONTANA ACLU inspects Montana jails 1990 Jail Suicide Update available Supreme Court to review modification of consent decrees (Ru/o) 3/9-1985 412-1985 17121-1988 See: PLYLER V. LEEKE NEW MEXICO Attorney general comments on prison riot Budget cuts don't excuse violations, says court New Mexico falls short on compliance NEW YORK Examining community alternatives Judge discusses "Tombs" litigation Remembering the Attica uprising Astudy of NY inmates with AIDS NPP lawyer's work rooted in New York, Attica Twenty years after Attica TB poses threat to prisons, jails NY alliance advocates for inmates with AIDS Progress slow on medical parole Agreement reached in statewide PA case 7/13-1986 11/14-1987 16/1-1988 10/13-1986 1119-1987 13/5-1987 1517-1988 16/12-1988 VoI.6/4I17-1991 VoI.7/1/1-1992 Vol. 7/2/18-1992 Vol. 7/3/18-1992 VoI.9I4/17-1994 SUMMER 1995 25 NORTH CAROLINA Examining community service alternatives Apreventable death at Butner BOP response to death of Vinson Harris Corrections staff involvement in execution PAT SEARCHES 10113-1986 16/9-1988 16/11-1988 17/6-1988 -04/3-1985 OHIO An analysis of Wilson v. Seiter decision Proving deliberate indifference after Wilson Citizens protest proposed prison Reflections on the Lucasville riot VoI.6/3/6CL-1991 VoI.6/4I3-1991 Vol. 7/3/3-1991 VoI.8/3114-1991 OKLAHOMA Juvenile system challenged in Terr)1 D. v. Rader Looking back at Battle v. Anderson Case brings reforms to Oklahoma juvenile system O'LONE V. ESTATE OF SHABAZZ Effect of Supreme Court decisions in O'Lone and Safley Religious rights, post-Shabazz 213-1984 10/1-1986 VoI.512/1-1990 15/8-1988 Vol. 5/4/9CL-1990 OVERCROWDING NPP's Status Report on the courts and the prisons 3/10-19,13124-1987,1817-1989,2217-1990, Vols.7/1I13-1992, 811/3-1993,9/113-1994,10/115-1995 (summary only) S.C. settlement limits population 511-1985 Hawaii settlement sets populations caps 5/3-1985 Judge sets population cap at D.C. Jail 5/6-1985 Population reduction program in Tennessee 811-1986 Court imposes population caps in Rl 8/5-1986 D.C. panics over jail population 8/8-1986 Court orders SC to comply with population limits 9/4-1986 The effects of 15 years of prison litigation 1116-1987 Judge discusses "Tombs" case 1119-1987 Appeals court upholds pop. cap in SC 11113-1987 Lawsuits fundamental to prison reform 13116-1987 Prisoners' lawyers face critical issues 13122-1987 The effect of Rhodes v. Chapman on overcrowding 14/4-1987 Overcrowding addressed in MD jail case agreement 15113-1988 New books on prison overcrowding 18/14-1989 High school students debate prison overcrowding Vo1.512115-1990 High school debater discusses overcrowding debate Vo1.512115-1990 After 200 years, PA prisons still have problems Vol. 5/311-1990 Appeals courts differ on overcrowding decisions VoI.5/4/9CL-1990 Judge orders changes at VA penitentiary Vo1.611114-1991 US prisons violate human rights VoI.6/3/4-1991 ACA asked to ease housing standards VoI.6/3114-1994 ACA votes to ease housing standards Vol. 7/115-1992 ABA report urges sentencing, corrections reform VoI.7/3/1-1992 Is double-ceiling unconstitutional? Vol.7/3113-1992 RI agreement provides permanent population control VoI.9/3/3-1994 -pPALM/GIANO V. SUNDLUN Improvements evident in RI prisons Court order promises further relief Court fines RI officials for noncompliance Palmigiano judge urges use of alternatives Agreement reached in RI case 26 SUMMER 1995 8/3-1986 PAROLE Reforming federal parole laws 13121-1987 Supreme Court decides Board ofPardons v. Allen 1416-1987 Any protection against revocation of parole? VoI.I0/1I8-1995 PELICAN BAY OAK PARK HEIGHTS Supermax facility sets high standards Muslims contest searches by female guards Conditions at Pelican Bay supermax challenged Pyschological consequences of isolation Decision in Pelican Bay case (Madrid v. Gomez) Analysis of Pelican Bay decision VoI.7/4I5-1992 VoI.812/3-1993 VoI.I0/1113-1995 IOI2I7CL-1995 PELTIER, LEONARD Political prisoners do exist in U.S. VoI.5/4I6-1990 PENITENTIARY 200th anniversary of penitentiary spurs debate Today's penitentiary differs from original Vol. 5/3/5-1990 Vol. 5/3116-1990 PENNSYLVANIA Private prison planned on toxic waste site Plans dropped for prison on toxic waste site After 200 years, PA prisons still have problems Today's penitentiary differs from original Community coalition boosts PA litigation Agreement reached in Austin v. Lehman PLYLER V. LEEKE SC settlement limits population Court orders SC to comply with decree Appeals court upholds pop. cap in SC case 5/10-1985 6/11-1985 Vo1.5/311 -1990 Vol. 5/3116-1990 Vol.712/12-1992 VoI.9/4I17-1994 511-1985 9/4-1986 11113-1987 POLITICAL PRISONERS Court denounces PCI-Lexington Control Unit Political prisoners do exist in U.S. 17/19-1988 VoI.5/4I6-1990 PRATT, GERONIMO Political prisoners do exist in U.S. Vol. 5/416-1990 PRETRIAL DETAINEES Searches, visits argued in Block Judge urges use of alternatives for detainees 119-1984 VoI.6/2I5-1991 PRISON JOURNALISM Odyssey: Norfolk (Mass.) State Prison's magazine VoI.8/1I1-1993 PRISON POPULATION US has world's highest incarceration rate PRISONER CORRESPONDENCE Supreme Court decides Turner v. Safley Effect of Safle)1 on inmate correspondence Vo1.61111-1991 1416-1987 15/8-1988 PRISONER EDUCATION Class in Alternatives to Violence Crime Bill ends Pell grants for prisoners VoI.8/4I14-1993 VoI.9/4I1-1994 PRISONER VISITATION AND SUPPORT PVS provides prisoners link to outside 512-1985 PRIVACY Court says "hands off" in Block decision 119-1984 PRIVATIZATION 3/1-1985 8/5-1986 2111-1989 VoI.612/5-1991 VoI.9/3/3-1994 Private firms venture into prison business Legal implications of privatization Private prison planned on toxic waste site Prison plans dropped at toxic waste site Correctional health care: past and future Contract medical care generates concerns 116-1984 211-1984 5110-1985 6/11-1985 13129-1987 2215-1990 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL Expansion of corrections-industrial complex in US U.S. companies extend corrections market overseas PROBATION Third party supervision aids probation -5Vo1.I0/1/1-1995 Vo1.I0/3/ -1995 VoI.6/1/16-1991 PROCUNIER V. MARTINEZ Supreme Court rejects Martinez standards in Turner Martinez and the Turner decision PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE DC Public Defender's Prisoners' Rights Program PUGH V. LOCKE Expert reflects on Alabama case Former NPP lawyer remembers Alabama case Nagel: an expert witness reflects Alabama prison-monitoring committee folds 1416-1987 15/8-1988 Vol. 8/1/19-1993 8/13-1986 13/8-1987 13/13-1987 20/1-1989 -RRACE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Racism in sentencing extensive problem 2112-1984 Battle revealed racial discrimination in Oklahoma 10/1-1986 Review of Wilbanks' book on racism, criminal justice 1l/10-1987 Remembering the Attica uprising 13/5-1987 Alabama case exposed racism 13/8-1987 McClesky decision tolerates racial bias in d.p. cases 1418-1987 Study reveals racial bias in sentencing 20/8-1989 Report finds racism in NY system VoI.5/4I6-1990 ABA report urges reforms VoI.7/3/1-1992 Inequalities in justice systems worldwide Vol.9/3/1-1994 RELIGION Muslim prisoners seek religious recognition 8/3-1986 Supreme Court decides O'Lone v. Estate ofShabazz 1416-1987 Effects of O'Lone decision 15/8-1988 Religious rights decisions, post-Shabazz VoI.5/4I9CL-1990 The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) Vol.9/1/13CL-1994 Litigation under RFRA VoI.9/4/2-1994 RHODE ISLAND Litigation in Rhode Island brings change Order promises further relief in RI prisons Court fines officials over noncompliance Palmigiano judge urges use of alternatives Agreement reached in Palmigiano case RI release program for AIDS prisoners RHODES V. CHAPMAN Rhodes presents litigators with critical issues Analyzing the effects of Rhodes RIOTS Remembering the Attica uprising NPP lawyer's work rooted in Attica ACA asked to ease housing standards 20 years after Attica Reflections on the Lucasville riot 311-1985 8/5-1986 21/1-1989 VoI.6/2/5-1991 Vol.9/3/3-1994 Vol.I0/3/ -1995 13/22-1987 1414-1987 13/5-1987 16/12-1988 VoI.6/3/14-1991 VoI.6/4/17-1991 VoI.8/3/14-1993 RUFO V. INMATES OF SUFFOLK COUNlYJAIL Supreme Court to review modification of consent decrees VoI.6/3/17-1991 An analysis of the Rufo decision Vol. 7/2I7CL-1992 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL SANDIN V. CONNER Supreme Court ruling in prisoner due process case Vo1.I0/3/ -1995 SENTENCING Racism in sentencing extensive problem Sentencing Project publishes sentencing directory Reforming federal sentencing and parole laws Involving victims and offenders in sentencing Interpreting BJS public opinion study Sentencing planning services, guidelines encourage alternatives Sentencing bibliography published Washington's sentencing guidelines effective Study reveals racial bias in sentencing Alternatives to the death penalty Judge resigns over sentencing guidelines ABA report urges sentencing, corrections reform 18/1-1989 18/15-1989 19/1-1989 20/8-1989 Vol. 5/3/6-1990 Vol. 5/418-1990 VoI.7/3/1-1992 SENTENCING PROJECT, THE Project publishes sentencing directory Project publishes analysis of NI] study Project publishes sentencing bibliography Incarceration rate highest in U.S., says report 12/13-1987 15/14-1988 18/15-1989 VoI.6/1/1-1991 2112-1984 12113-1987 13/21-1987 1419-1987 15/10-1988 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS Parties move toward settlement in AZ SC settlement limits population Hard-fought settlement reached in Hawaii case Revived settlement halts trial in AZ Experts negotiates settlement in Hawaii Settlement reached in D.C. juvenile case 12/3-1987 5/1-1985 5/3-1985 5/4-1985 6/6-1985 10/12-1986 SEXUAL HARASSMENT What rights does a prisoner have to end sexual harassment? VoU 0/3/ -1995 SEX OFFENDERS Depo-provera treatment raises questions SMOKING Smoking in prison: a question of rights Analysis of Helling v. McKinney Can smoking be banned in prison? 411-1985 12/12-1987 VoI.8/4I7CL-1993 VoI.9/2/15-1994 SOUTH CAROLINA SC settlement limits population Execution in SC for juvenile crime challenged Court orders SC to comply with decree Appeals court upholds pop. cap in SC 5/1-1985 7/13-1986 9/4-1986 11/13-1987 SOUTH DAKOTA Lawsuit challenges violations at penitentiary Inmate describes being a class representative 416-1985 13/19-1987 SOUTHERN CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS Death penalty lawyers accept ACLU award VoI.6/4I1-1991 SPEAR V. ARIYOSHI Settlement reached in Hawaii case Expert panel negotiates settlement in Hawaii 5/3-1985 6/6-1985 SPECIAL MASTERS Special masters aid in compliance efforts Special master appointed in Tennessee Special master's role in Tennessee case Judge discusses special masters Role of special masters ripe for debate How to work effectively with special masters 6/9-1985 8/1-1986 8/2-1986 11/9-1987 13/15-1987 VoI.5/4/1-1990 SUMMER 1995 27 -y- STANDARDS Health care standards published SUICIDE NIC to study jail suicides Jail suicide study, training curriculum released 1990 Jail Suicide Update available 11/l2-1987 11112-1987 18/14-1989 VoI.6/1I5-1991 VICTIMS' RIGHTS PACT publishes VORP Network News 12/15-1987 Involving victims and offenders in sentencing 1419-1987 Victim-Offender mediation assn. established 19/13-1989 Victim services and alternatives to the death penalty Vol. 5/3/6-1990 SUPREME COURT, U.S. Court says 'hands off' in Block v. Rutherford 119-1984 Court upholds death penalty for juvenile crime 7/13-1986 Recent prisoners' rights decisions by Court 8/7-1986 Recent prisoners' rights decisions by Court 14/6-1987 Effect of Court's decisions in O'Lone and Safley 15/8-1988 Court to hear brutality case (Hudson v. McMillian) VoI.6/3/1-1991 Court to review modification of consent decrees (Rufo v. Inmates ofSuffolk Co. Jail) VoI.6/3/l7-1991 Court decides in favor of prisoner in Hudson VoI.7/2/1-1992 Analysis of Helling v. MCKintze)! VoI.8/4/7CL-1993 Analysis of Farme/" v. B/"ennall decision Vol. 9/3/6CL-1994 Criminal contempt - the Bagwell decision Vol. 9/4/6CL-1994 Due process rights - the Sandin decision VoU 0/31 -1995 WALKER, JOANN In memory SWEDEN Swedes confused by U.S. death penalty Swedes enact animal treatment legislation WASHINGTON Reforms, guidelines reduce prison population Prison population may increase 1911-1989 22/18-1990 WASHINGTON V. TINNEY Highlights 14116-1987 4/9-1985 1919-1989 -TTENNESSEE Court orders spur prison reform in Tennessee Special Master's role in Tennessee case End of Tennessee prison case TERRY D. V. RADER Lawsuit challenges Oklahoma juvenile system Lawsuit leads to reform in Oklahoma juvenile system TRANSFERS Can transfers be blocked? TUBERCULOSIS TB poses threat to prisoners TB case damage award, Hillli. Marshall NPP releases TB booklet Dangers posed by spread of TB 8/l-1986 812-1986 Vo1.8/4/1-1993 2/3-1984 Vol. 5/2/1-1990 118-1984 1/l2-1984 4/12-1985 Vol. 5/4/9CL-1990 VoI.9/4/11-1994 Vo1.7/l/l-1986 Vol. 7/4/6CL-1986 VoI.8/1I17-1986 VoU 0/2/1-1986 TURNER V. SAFLEY Effect of Supreme Court decisions in O'Lone and Safley 15/8-1988 -uU.S. V. MICHIGANIKNOP V. JOHNSON NPP challenges Michigan consent decree An update on the Michigan case 1/l-1984 12/8-1987 URINALYSIS Urinalysis not always reliable 9/13-1986 USE OF FORCE (See Brutality) 28 SUMMER 1995 3/2-1985 13/3-1987 22/1-1990 Vo1.6/1114-1991 VoI.8/4I14-1993 VOTING RIGHTS Ex-offenders find barriers to voting 3/3-1985 -wVoI.9/4I18-1994 WEST VIRGINIA Conditions spark Moundsville disturbance conditions TEXAS Unusual practices found in Texas jails Legislature develops prison reform package Highlights TILLERY V. OWENS Third Circuit upholds ban on double-ceiling VIRGINIA Lawyer access a problem at Mecklenburg Early prisoner advocacy efforts in Virginia Is Joe Giarratano innocent? Judge orders changes at VA penitentiary Class in Alternatives to Violence held at Augusta WHITLEY V. ALBERS Supreme Court decides use of force case Courts stretch meaning of Whitle)! v. Albers 7/12-1986 8/7-1986 VoI.5/3/3-1990 WICKBERG, RON In memory Vo1.9/4117-1994 WILSON V. SEITER An analysis of Wilson decision Proving deliberate indifference after Wilson Alook at post-Wilson decisions NPP attorney discusses Wilson VoI.6/3/6CL-1991 VoI.6/4/3-1991 VoI.6/4/6CL-1991 VoI.6/4/l4-1991 WOMEN Women in jail have special problems ACLU opens Women Prisoners' Rights Project Prison not always answer for female offenders Few alternative programs exist for women Pursuing equal treatment for women in prison The connections between feminism and justice Imprisoned mothers face extra hardships Litigation targets medical care in women's prisons New Minnesota women's prison is human'e Court denounces FCI-Lexington Control Unit States study policies affecting women offenders Elderly prison population includes women High number of girls held as status offenders AIDS education program for women at Rikers Island Alternative programs that work NPP releases new bibliography on women in prison Women prisoners develop AIDS education program AIDS education for women Women's peer AIDS education programs Can women prisoners sue over sex discrimination? New York programs for incarcerated parents National conference on women prisoners with mY/AIDS 2/9-1984 7110-1986 11/1-1987 12/9-1987 13/26-1987 13/33-1987 1411-1987 1511-1988 17/16-1988 17119-1988 19/4 -1989 20/9-1989 Vo1.512118-1990 Vol. 5/3/18-1990 VoI.6/3/2-1991 VoI.614111-1991 VoI.6/4I18-1991 VoI.8/4/18-1993 VoI.9/1I22-1994 VoI.9/3/13-1994 VoI.9/4I5-1994 VoUO/3/ -1995 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL Continuedfrom page 4 "difficult history."; Within a year of opening the company's management team had to be changed and an international consultant enlisted to implement a suicide prevention strategy. Since November 1992 there have been five deaths in custody, as well as riots, fires, a drug overdose and allegations of rapes and serious assaults. Tear gas has been used to quell riots, explained by a Wackenhut director as "a humane way to obtain order quickly rather than a lot'of staff with batons striking people."6 ]unee, also run by ACM was, according to reports, "plagued by problems since it opened... "7 including a comparatively high rate of prisoner on prisoner assaults. In August 1994 however, the prison received high marks in its annual performance review from the Queensland Department of Corrective Services. But in October 1994, the New South Wales Government Ombudsman reported]unee's staff turnover "at a rate which puts it above most NSW gaols and rising" and "already the prison is having problems recruiting The Chief Inspector has yet to visit Premier Prison Service's Doncaster prison but alleged incidents of bullying and drug taking among prisoners and a number of other incidents caused earl\' concern among probation officers. the police and social services. Following two suicides a Member Of ParliameI1l called for a public inquiry into the running of the prison. The U.K.'s current prison services privatization program includes 13 prisons, (one tenth of the total) with six contracts let to date; five new secure training centers for young offenders (contracts yet to be awarded) and the country's entire prisoner transportation service. The latter is being hived off by regions and no U.S.owned companies have so far won a contract. While the UX and Australia have proved willing privatizers, two years ago there appeared to be little scope for a wider European corrections market. But the privatization programs currently developing across western and eastern Europe might well prove fertile ground for further U.S. expansion in the future.• Stephen Nathan researches privatization for the Prison Reform Trust in England. IJC Bradford & Co, Equity Research, p.ll, January 1995. lUKDS Briefing Paper, May 1993. '\\greement between CCA International Inc. and Iniziative Industriali S.p.A., p.l, February 1988. <The Australian, April 22, 1995. iBurgess, M. "The Queensland Experience," Socio Legal Bulletin, p.24, Autumn 1994. 6Private Prisons in Australia: Cause For Concern, Prison Reform Trust, p.6, October 1994. -The Wagga Advertiser, July 22, 1994. 8Report of NSW Ombudsman 1993-94. 'lHM Prison Blakenhurst, Report by MJ Chief Inspector of Prisons, Home Office, pp.86-97, May 1995. 1.CCA specialists, particularly psychologists and other non-custodial staff...the second full year of operation for ]unee will be a very testing one indeed."8 Following a host of other problems, CCA's joint U.K. venture, VIillS, became the first private operator to be penalized by the government when it was fined £41,000 (U.S. $59,000) after losing control of Blakenhurst during a disturbance in February 1994. In February 1995, Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons, Judge Stephen Tumim, published a report of his team's inspection of Blakenhurst eight months earlier. Acknowledging that 12 months is a "relatively short time for any establishment to develop a balanced culture," he said that "the most impressive feature was the quality, enthusiasm and potential of staff: the most disappointing feature was the comparative shortage of innovation." His 109-page report also included over 100 recommendations for improvement. 9 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL '.U.S.:Correetions Corporation of Anierica (CCA) CCA International Inc . (tOO percent owned) . " 0;1;: CCA + John Mowlem + Sir Robert McAlpine = U.K. Detention Services (one third owned) . , " Australia: ,CCA + Chubb Security Holdings =Corrections Corporation of Australia " . ,'. ,(SQ· percent owned). . • Outside,of the U.K, Belgium, Australia: CCA + Sodexho SA (51/49p~rcent in favor of CCA or 49151 percent share). 2. Wackenhut • U.S.: Wackenhut Corporation Wack~nhut .Corrections Corporalion (WCC) (l00 percent owned) " ' • U.K.:WCC + Serco =Premier Prison Services Ltd (50 percent owned) WCC + Trafalget House + Serco = Premier Custodial Developments Ltd (one third owned). . ' • Australia: Wackenhut Corrections Corporation Australia Pty Ltd (l00 percent owned). WCC = Australasian Correctional Management Pty Ltd (now 100 percent owned, formerly 50f50with'TbiessContractors). WCC + National Australia Bank = Australasian Correctional Services Pty Ltd (now 66.7 percent owned, formerly also included Thiess) . 3. Corrections Partners Inc. • U.S.: Founded in 1991 by merger of Correctional Services Group Inc + Correction ManagementAffiliates. . ' " .' Australia:·CPf+ Skilled Engineering + Multiplex Construction + BZW Australia='·, ' ' CorrPac Pty Ltd . . . " • U~K.:CPI +Wimpey+AMEC +fourihcolllpany = ,·COP.S9rHUIIl. SUMMER 1995 29 te BY JACKIE WALKER National Conference Looks At Women Prisoners Living with HIV/AIDS he National HIV Infection in Women Conference was held in Washington, D.C. from February 22 to 24, 1995. It included workshops and sessions highlighting women prisoners living with HIV/AIDS. Workshop topics ranged from the clinical needs of women prisoners living with HIViAIDS to HIV/AIDS among female arrestees in New York City. One session included a statement from an HIV-positive prisoner in Massachusetts. The prisoner described the impact of sexual abuse on the lives of women and condemned the lack of condoms and clean needles to combat HIV/AIDS within prison. 1\vo interesting presentations were a paper on how Rhode Island's Prison Release Program has reduced recidivism among women living with HIV/AIDS and a workshop which explored the impact of sexual abuse on HIV/AIDS infection among women at the Massachusetts Correctional Institute-Framingham. T Rhode Island's Prison Release Program Thirty-nine percent of all HIV-infected women in Rhode Island are diagnosed at the Adult Correctional Institution (ACI). This figure is compounded by a high recidivism rate among women prisoners with HIV/AIDS. APrison Release Program was developed to address concerns expressed by HIV/ AIDS education specialists such as Lenore Normandy, R.N., that there is no followup or medical treatment for former prisoners. The Rhode Island Departments of Health and Corrections and the Brown University AIDS Program collaborate during the six 30 SUMMER 1995 months prior to the prisoner's release date to plan for post-release treatment and followup. All women are reqUired to establish medical follow-up with three HIV clinics in Rhode Island. Referrals for financial support, substance abuse treatment, and housing are provided based on a woman's needs, and follow-up is then conducted three and six months after release. Data collected on women prisoners with HIV/AIDS who participated in the program from June 1992 through July 1993 revealed a number of accomplishments. Women who participated had a recidivism rate of 12% within six months and 17% within 12 months. This compared favorably to an identical population of HIVnegative women who had recidivism rates of 22% within six months and 37% within 12 months. The program has also succeeded in other areas. Seventy-nine percent of women in the program were able to receive some form of financial assistance and 68% received support from substance abuse programs. Over 70% chose to continue receiving medical care from the same medical provider. One of the reasons for the high follow-up is Dr. Timothy Flanigan, Director of the HIV Care Program at the ACI. According to Dr. Flanigan, "Most prisoners have never had primary care. And being part of a minority group often means having difficulty in being treated. We offer the opportunity to be treated in a humane manner and follow-up with the same medical provider." One graduate of the program is now working as an outreach counselor; others have successfully reunited with their children. The program has received national attention. Representatives from a number of state correctional departments have reviewed the program as a blueprint for reorganizing their own release planning efforts. MCI-Framingham's Infectious Disease Clinic At the Massachusetts'Correctional Institute for Women in Framingham, prisoners living with HIV/AIDS have access to a weekly infectious disease clinic, a rarity in prison. For the past three years Dr. Anne De Groot has operated the clinic with the assistance of a nurse and case manager. Dr. De Groot initiated a study on childhood sexual abuse among prisoners living with HIV/AIDS. She had become frustrated with her inability to get women to participate in their own health care; a colleague suggested a survey of women attending the clinic on childhood sexual abuse. Dr. De Groot formulated a basic questionnaire and incorporated it into her physician intake form. Her findings from the 1993-1994 period were first published in thejournal ofCorrectional Health Care. Of the 88 women interviewed, 42% had histories of childhood sexual abuse. HIV infection was 2.8 times more prevalent among survivors of childhood sexual abuse than among women with no history of childhood sexual abuse. Survivors of childhood sexual abuse were also 1.8 times more likely to have unprotected sex and 2.1 times more likely to have used injection drugs. The impact of these surveys has gone beyond the realm of data collection. Within the prison women have begun to request more services directed towards sexual abuse recovery. Aformer prisoner has begun to speak about her own history of childhood sexual abuse to youth groups. In addition, Dr. De Groot has researched seroconversion (when a person converts from HIV negative to positive) rates among women at MCI-Framingham. Asmall study of seroconversion rates within prison found a rate of 16% among reincarcerated women. These statistics have become the motivating force in developing Project Zero, a program designed to reduce the seroconversion rates of recently incarcerated women. In reflecting on her work Dr. De Groot believes, "We need to overcome this attitude that criminals are genetically deformed. I see the women I work with as wonderful individuals who've had horrible lives." • jackie Walker is the Project's AIDS Information Coordinator. THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL blications Bibliography of Material on Women in Prison lists information on this subject available from the National Prison Project and other sources concerning health care, drug treatment, incarcerated mothers, juveniles, legislation, parole, the death penalty, sex discrimination, race and more. 35 pages. $5 prepaid from NPP. The Prisoners' Assistance Directory, the result of a national survey, identifies and describes various organizations and agencies that provide assistance to prisoners. Lists national, state, and local organizations and sources of assistance including legal, AIDS, family support, and ex-offender aid. 10th Edition, published January 1993. Paperback, $30 prepaid from NPP. QTY COST QTY COST Fill out and send with check payable to: Name The National Prison Project 1875 Connecticut Ave., NW #410 Washington, D.C. 20009 Address THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJEG JOURNAL AIDS in Prisons: The Facts for Inmates and Officers is a simply written educational tool for prisoners, corrections staff, and AIDS service providers. The booklet answers in an easy-toread format commonly asked questions concerning the meaning of AIDS, the medical treatment available, legal rights and responsibilities. Also available in Spanish. Sample copies free. Bulk orders: 100 copies/$25. 500 copies/$100. 1,000 copies/$150 prepaid. A Primer for Jail Litigators is a detailed manual with practical suggestions for jail litigation . It includes chapters on legal analysis, the use of expert witnesses, class actions, attorneys' fees, enforcement, discovery, defenses' proof, remedies, and many practical suggestions. Relevant case citations and correctional standards. 1st Edition, February 1984. 180 pages, paperback. (Note: This is not a "jailhouse lawyers" manual.) $20 prepaid from NPP. The National Prison ProjectjOURNAL, $30/yr. $2Iyr. to prisoners. The National Prison Project Status Report lists by state those presently under court order, or those which have pending litigation either involving the entire state prison system or major institutions within the state. Lists cases which deal with overcrowding and/or the total conditions of confinement. (No jails except District of Columbia.) Updated January 1993. $5 prepaid from NPP. 1990 AIDS in Prison Bibliography lists resources on AIDS in prison that are available from the National Prison Project and other sources, including corrections policies on AIDS, educational materials, medical and legal articles, and recent AIDS studies. $5 prepaid from NPP. TB: The Facts for Inmates and Officers answers commonly-asked questions about tuberculosis (TB) in a simple question-and-answer format. Discusses what tuberculosis is, how it is contracted, its symptoms, treatment and how HlV infection affects TB. Single copies free. Bulk orders: 100 copies/ $25. 500 copies/$100. 1,000 copies/$150 prepaid. City, State, ZIP (order from ACLUj QTY COST ACLU Handbook, The Rights of Prisoners. Guide to the legal rights of prisoners, parolees, pre-trial detainees, etc., in question-and-answer form. Contains citations. $7.95; $5 for prisoners. ACLL Dept. L. P.O. Box -94. i\-ledford. \Y 11-6:\. _ _ _ SUMMER 1995 31 he following are major developments in the National Prison Project's litigation program since March 31, 1995. Further details of any of the listed cases may be obtained by writing the Project. T Casey v. Lewis-In May 1995, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to the defendants for review of the trial court's ruling that the Arizona department of Corrections' policies unconstitutionally restrict prisoners' access to the courts. The trial court's ruling was made in November 1992. Following oral argument in November 1994, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a unanimous decision, upheld the trial court's ruling, affirming virtually all of the trial court's order which applies to all 15,000 prisoners in the Arizona system. The order, however, has not been implemented because in May 1994 the Supreme Court, with four Justices dissenting, granted a stay of the trial court decision. Dulany v. Carnahan-At the request and with the assistance of the local ACLU affiliate, the NPP began investigating conditions in the Missouri prison system several months ago. Agreement was reached on a number of issues. However, no agreement was reached to improve the medical, mental health and dental care provided to National Prison Project American Civil liberties Union Foundation 1875 Connecticut Ave., NW, #410 Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 234-4830 women at the Chillico the Correctional Center and the Renz Correctional Center. On June 7, the NPP, together with the local ACLU affiliate, filed a class action suit on behalf of the women prisoners alleging inadequacies in the medical care delivery system, including inadequate emergency care and treatment for women with chronic health problems. The complaint alleges that among this latter group are a paraplegic woman confined to a wheelchair who receives no physical therapy, severely mentally ill patients who do not receive medication regularly and are not seen by a psychiatrist, and women with HIY/AIDS who are denied appropriate medical care. Medical care at all Missouri prisons is prOVided by Correctional Medical Systems (CMS) under contract to the state's Department of Corrections. Sandin v. Conner-The NPP filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the respondent in this case before the Supreme Court. Conner, a Hawaii state prisoner, claimed that he was punished with 30 days of solitary confinement without an adequate due process hearing after allegedly resisting a strip-search. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, overturning the trial court's ruling in favor of prison officials, held that the prisoner had a right not to be arbitrarily subjected to punitive segregation. In an opinion issued this June 19, the Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit's ruling. The 5-4 opinion held that the prisoner had no "liberty interest," that might entitle him to a range of procedural protections, because the punishment he received did not impose any unusual or significant hardship beyond his normal conditions of confinement. Schumate v. Wilson-The NPP was asked by local lawyers and activists to assist with a challenge to medical care at the Central California Women's Facility at Chowchilla and the California Institution for Women at Frontera. Together, these prisons house approximately 5,600 prisoners. Prisoners allege that they receive systemically inadequate treatment for a number of chronic diseases, including HIV, and that the facility suffers from inadequate staffing, specialty services, and emergency care. Women who test positive for HIV have their medical status disclosed, in part by the location of their housing. The NPP, together with the Northern and Southern California ACLU affiliates, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, Central California Legal Services, and the law fit:m of Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe in San Francisco, filed suit in April. • Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postage PAID Washington D.C. Permit No. 5248 Printed on Recycled Paper 32 SUMMER 1995 THE NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT JOURNAL