 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
FEDERAL COURT STRIKES DOWN PROPOSITION 9'S PAROLE REVOCATION PROCEDURES January 24, 2012 -- A federal court struck down provisions enacted by Proposition 9 that greatly limited due process rights in parole revocation hearings and conflicted with an Injuction previously entered in the class-action case Valdivia v. Davis. Although the court modified the Valdivia Injuction to allow parole officials additional time (45 days) to conduct full parole revocation hearings, the court otherwise held that Proposition 9 was unconstitutional. See the Court Order FRESNO JAIL PRISONERS SUE OVER DANGEROUS CONDITIONS December 13, 2011 -- The Prison Law Office and other law firms filed a class action lawsuit seeking to remedy cruel and unusual conditions in the Fresno County Jail. The suit describes how prisoners have been subjected to violence and denied mental health care and medical treatment for life-threatening illnesses. Read the Complaint and Press Release. COURT ORDERS DIVISION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE TO PROVIDE EDUCATION AND PROGRAMMING AND SETS HEARING TO DECIDE IF STATE OFFICIALS SHOULD BE HELD IN CONTEMPT. August 4, 2011 -- A judge has found that the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) is in violation of its duties to provide education and programming to wards housed in its facilities. The Court granted a motion for enforcement, set deadlines for the DJJ to comply with its obligations under the Farrell v. Cate Remedial Plan, and ordered state officials to show cause why the court should not hold them in contempt. Read the Court's Order.
In January 2012, the Special Master in the Farrell v. Cate case released the Twentieth Quarterly Report. Farrell is a lawsuit brought to remedy abysmal conditions in the DJJ, the state's lock-up units for young offenders. For more information on the case, or to review prior expert and special master reports, please visit the Major Cases page. U.S. SUPREME COURT RULES CALIFORNIA PRISON OVERCROWDING UNCONSTITUTIONAL May 23, 2011 -- In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that overcrowding in California's prisons results in cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court's ruling means the state must reduce its prison population by approximately 32,000 prisoners within the next two years. Read the Court Opinion and Press Release. Other materials from the U.S. Supreme Court case are available, including the recording and transcript of the oral arguments, the Prison Law Office's brief on behalf of prisoners with medical needs (the Plata class), Rosen, Bien & Galvan's brief on behalf of mentally-ill prisoners (the Coleman class), and the California Correctional Peace Officers' Association's brief supporting the prisoners' position. A selection of the trial transcripts and exhibits, including videos and photos, is available at Rosen, Bien & Galvan's website. The Court affirmed a January 2010 order made by three federal judges directing California officials to reduce the state's severe prison overcrowding. The Order requires California to reduce its prison overcrowding to 137.5 percent of design capacity, in accord with a plan submitted by the state in November 2009. The population reduction order is the result of lengthy litigation. The matter was initiated when federal judges who oversee California's prison medical and mental health care systems ordered that a three-judge court be convened to consider placing limits on California's prison population. The orders were issued after the judges concluded that California prisons are unable to provide constitutionally-adequate medical care (Plata) and mental health care (Coleman) due in part to severe overcrowding. View the Plata v. Schwarzenegger Order and the Coleman v. Schwarzenegger Order. A trial in front of a federal three-judge court began on November 18, 2008. On August 4, 2009, the three judges found that overcrowding is the primary cause of unconstitutional conditions in California's prisons, such as the system's inability to provide competent and timely health care for prisoners. The judges also found compelling evidence that reducing the prison population is the only way to address the problems. The judges issued a 184-page order for the state to come up with a plan to reduce the prison population by up to 40,000, to 137.5% of the system's design capacity within two years. On November 12, 2009, the State submitted its plan. Included in the state' plan are changes adopted by recently-passed legislation. The plan calls for increasing the prison system's capacity in various ways, diverting some felons to county jails or home detention, reducing revocations of probation and parole, and granting some prisoners additional sentence credits. The State's plans are summarized in our information letter (updated November 2011) also in Spanish. For more detailed background information on the Plata and Coleman cases, visit our Major Cases page. PRISON LAW OFFICE FILES CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT TO END RACIALLY DISCRIMINATORY LOCKDOWNS April 27, 2011 -- The Prison Law Office and Bingham McCutchen LLP have filed a class action lawsuit demanding that California prison officials stop imposing racially discriminatory lockdowns. Read the Complaint and Press Release. Under official CDCR policy, when there is an incident involving people of any race, all prisoners of that race are locked in their cells for 24 hours a day. More than 350 race-based lockdowns are imposed each year; these lockdowns last on average more than two months, and sometimes stretch on for years. 2011 SUPPLEMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE PRISONERS HANDBOOK NOW AVAILABLE March 1, 2011 -- The 2011 Supplement to The California State Prisoners Handbook (4th Ed. 2008) has just been released! The 125-page Supplement discusses the numerous legal developments in prison and parole law since October 2007, plus updated forms and appendices. See the Order Form for details. FEDERAL COURT ORDERS CONTINUED MONITORING AND ADDITIONAL PLANS TO PROTECT SAFETY AND RIGHTS OF DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED PRISONERS September 16, 2010 -- A federal district court judge has issued an Order in Clark v. California rejecting the CDCR's motion to terminate a consent decree and remedial plan that requires the state to protect developmentally disabled prisoners from injury and discrimination. The court found that the state prison system is not providing the services and assistance required by the remedial plan and that additional remedial measures are necessary to improve staff training, identification and auditing procedures. For more background on the Clark case, visit the Major Cases page. COURT FINDS BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS STILL NEEDS TO WORK TO REDUCE BACKLOG OF LIFE PRISONER PAROLE HEARINGS August 20, 2010 -- The Marin County Superior Court issued an Order denying the Board of Parole Hearing's request to dismiss a case brought to remedy a backlog of life prisoner parole hearings (In re Lugo, formerly In re Rutherford). The Court found that although the Board had agreed to eliminate the backlog by September 2007, the Board has never made good on that promise. Indeed, during the 13 months prior to May 2010, the Board did not come close to meeting its goal of having not more than a 5 percent backlog of hearings. You will need Acrobat Reader to view some of these documents. |
|
||||
