In 2001, a Californian court decided that prisoners have a constitutional right to procreate by artificial insemination.
This was after a prisoner who was serving a life sentence (LWOP) challenged the decision by the prison not to let him send semen out to his wife.

More literature on this decision can be found here:

http://www.library.law.pace.edu/research/prisoners4.html#Marriage

(this is a list of articles about this decision).

I found this too:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/5043/LEGAL/judges/

Incarceration Insemination

Gerber v. Hickman, 264 F.3d 882 (9th Cir. 2001): The court granted a state prisoner's right to procreate by mailing his sperm to his wife. A full panel of the court re-heard and reversed that decision.

The prisoner alleged that the defendant, the prison's warden, and the state Department of Corrections denied his fundamental right to procreate in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of substantive due process. The prisoner desired to collect and mail his semen to a laboratory that would impregnate his spouse, who was not incarcerated.

The district court ruled that the prisoner had no right to procreate that survived during his incarceration and denied relief. The court of appeals reasoned that a prisoner had a fundamental right to procreate after incarceration, and a right to be married while incarcerated. Although the prisoner was not entitled to conjugal visits because he was serving a life sentence, the court found that the warden had not raised a legitimate penological objective that would justify a total ban on the artificial insemination of a non-incarcerated partner.

Here another article:

http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5000675790

Procreation and the Prisoner: Does the Right to Procreate Survive Incarceration and Do Legitimate Penological Interests Justify Restrictions on the Exercise of the Right
Journal article by Richard Guidice Jr.; Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 29, 2002