![]() Islamic Organization Petitions to Let Muslim Women Prisoners Wear Hijabs, by Christopher Zoukis.NY Prisoner’s Youthful Age Considered in Modifying Prison Disciplinary Sanction.Court Employee Fired for Helping Wrongfully Convicted Prisoner Prove His Innocence, by Christopher Zoukis.Medical Parole for Texas Prisoners on the Decline, by Matthew Clarke.Qualified Immunity Denied to Prison Psychiatrist who Prescribed Lethal Drug Combination $450,000 Settlement. #WATCH CONTRABAND TRIAL#California: Sexually Violent Predator Entitled to Jury Trial on Petition Seeking Conditional Release.Arrested: What to do When Your Loved One’s in Jail, by Wes Denham, by John Dannenberg.Prisoner Assaulted in Tennessee Jail Settles Suit for $530,000, by Derek Gilna.Iowa: Bad Faith or Misconduct can Overcome Mental-Process Privilege in Disciplinary Case.California: State Prisoner Cannot Serve Concurrent Sentence in County Jail.New Trial Granted in Jail Strip Search Case Following Jury Verdict $385,000 Settlement, by Matthew Clarke.PLN Settles Censorship Suit Against Texas County Jail for $175,000.PA Prison Lieutenant Fired After Assisting in Criminal Investigation.California: Felons with Prior Juvenile Strikes Excluded from County Jail Placement Under Realignment Act.Possession of Rape Video Warrants Restitution Victim Awarded Over $1 Million Thus Far Supreme Court Grants Cert.Ninth Circuit: 9-Year Detention Pending Civil Commitment Proceeding Warrants Habeas Relief.Confronting Prison Slave Labor Camps and Other Myths, by James Kilgore.The Effects of Private Prison Confinement in Minnesota on Offender Recidivism.What Are the Odds of Complete Reversal After Conviction in the Second Circuit?, by Peter Schmidt.Bankruptcy Injunction Covers Pre-petition Incarceration Costs, but Not Those that Accrue Afterwards.Prison Phone Justice Campaign: Recent Developments.Violence, Security Lapses and Media Attention Lead to Reforms at Georgia Prison, by David Reutter.Berzon expressed the view that a reasonable prison official would have known that, in combination, the 24-hour bright lights, absence of a mattress and extensive restraints risked depriving Chappell of sleep in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and that Chappell therefore should have had an opportunity to prove to a jury that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to the risk of physical or psychological harm created by the conditions of his confinement while on contraband watch. On interlocutory appeal, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of summary judgment on those claims, holding the law was not clearly established as to whether the conditions of the contraband watch to which Chappell was subjected in 2002 violated the Eighth Amendment, or whether those conditions constituted an “atypical and significant hardship” sufficient to trigger due process protections. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendant prison officials on all but two of Chappell’s claims – that the contraband watch constituted cruel and unusual punishment and that his due process rights were violated when he had neither received notice of nor an opportunity to rebut the charges against him before he was placed on contraband watch. § 1983 alleging various constitutional violations. There, chained to the bed and under constant bright lights so staff could observe him, Chappell was forced to “eat food like a dog.”Īfter having three bowel movements that did not reveal any drugs, he was released from contraband watch on May 6, 2002.Ĭhappell subsequently filed suit under 42 U.S.C. Finally, he was placed in a surveillance cell with no furniture other than a bed without a mattress. He was then put in ankle shackles and a waist chain. He was also dressed in two jumpsuits, one worn normally and the other backwards, with the suits taped at the thighs, ankles, waist and upper arms to close off any openings. He was then put on contraband watch to determine whether he had ingested or secreted any other drugs.Ĭhappell was placed in two pairs of underwear, one worn normally and the other backwards, with the underwear taped at the waist and thighs. On April 30, 2002, shortly after Philissa Richard, the fiancée of CSP-Sacramento prisoner Rex Chappell, admitted she was the owner of a discarded hairpiece – which had tested positive for cocaine residue – found during a search of the area around the prison visiting room, guards searched Chappell’s cell and discovered methamphetamine. Share: Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on G+ Share with emailĪ divided panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that California prison officials are entitled to qualified immunity on a prisoner’s claim that the conditions of a six-day contraband watch – which included 24-hour lighting, the absence of a mattress and extensive bodily restraints – violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |