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 discip
inary 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 litera

y "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