Daveswife
12-03-2002, 06:07 PM
Knowledge is power! - forwarded to Virginia CURE members.
(If you wish to be deleted from this list, please email "please remove.")
Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants-Virginia, Inc.(Virginia CURE)
P.O. Box 19453 € Alexandria, VA 22320-0453
Phone and fax: 703/765-6549 € €web page: http://www.vacure.org
Yahoo Group: VirginiaPrisoners@***********.com
Reminders
Virginia CURE dues are payable on a calendar year basis - are tax deductible - mail to address above
Please designate your United Way contribution to Virginia CURE - No. 7315 - A Local Unaffilitated Charity, Combined Federal Campaign of the National Capital Area.
Please consider a contribution to Virginia CURE to purchase postage stamps for Virginia CURE's Christmas Cards to Prisoners Project. Cards will be prepared on December 14, 2002 - Volunteers call us at 703/765-6549.
----------
From: "Federal CURE, Inc." <director@fedcure.org>
Reply-To: FedCURE@***********.com
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 15:43:06 -0000
To: FedCURE@***********.com
Subject: [FedCURE] Supreme Court Case on Inmate Visiting Rights
Monday, December 2, 2002
Associated Press
Supreme Court agrees to consider limits on inmate visits
Also supporting Michigan were Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas.
The Supreme Court said Monday it will decide if inmates have
constitutional rights to jailhouse visits from young relatives and
others in a case that could have far-reaching implications for
prisons around the country.
The high court over the years has upheld restrictions on books,
packages and visitors at prisons.
Justices will consider whether Michigan went too far in banning
visits by some children and former prisoners and stripping
visitation privileges from drug-using inmates. An appeals court
sided with inmates, ruling earlier this year that imprisonment
doesn't erase a person's First Amendment right to associate with
others.
Michigan and 11 other states argued that the rules should be
reinstated. States and the federal government have varying
regulations for inmate visits, so the court's ultimate decision
will
clarify what's allowed.
The Michigan inmates' lawyer argued that Michigan had the harshest
visitation rules in the country, allowing someone to permanently
lose the right to see family members or friends after two drug or
alcohol infractions.
"This unique and extraordinarily harsh punishment had a devastating
effect on prisoners and their families," attorney Deborah LaBelle
told justices in a filing.
Justices must weigh Michigan authorities' ability to control their
prisons against the rights of inmates. States usually win in such
cases.
Michigan's rules ban visits from prisoners' minor relatives, like
brothers and sisters and nieces and nephews. Children and
grandchildren are allowed to come to the prison, unless the
parental
rights have been terminated.
Michigan Attorney General Jennifer Granholm told the court that the
rules were changed because of many visitation problems, including
the molestation of a child during a visit.
Michigan's rules were imposed in 1995 and challenged by a group of
inmates, including Michelle Bazzetta, who was convicted in the
death
of her then-husband's stepmother nearly 20 years ago.
"Under our constitution, even those lawfully imprisoned for serious
crimes retain some basic constitutional rights," the
Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said. "In the
present case, the regulations fall below minimum standards of
decency owed by a civilized society to those it has incarcerated."
The appeals court said the ban on visitors is cruel and unusual
punishment.
The last time the Supreme Court handled a major prison visitation
case was in 1989, also involving a case from the 6th Circuit.
Justices upheld Kentucky's visitation rules then.
Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar told the court that the
appeals court decision "is potentially disruptive to prison
management across the country." He said limits on visitation are
needed to encourage good behavior and control contraband, which can
be brought in by visitors.
The case is significant because there are 1.4 million inmates in
state and federal prisons.
Also supporting Michigan were Alabama, Idaho, Indiana,
Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Dakota,
and Texas.
Michigan rules also prohibit former prisoners who are not immediate
family from visiting. Prisoners who violate the department's drug
abuse policies twice are only allowed to be visited by attorneys
and
clergy.
The class-action lawsuit against Michigan did not challenge other
visitation rules, including a limit on monthly visits, regulations
on times and dates of visits.
The case is Overton v. Bazzetta, 02-94.
On the Net:
Supreme Court: www.supremecourtus.gov/
(If you wish to be deleted from this list, please email "please remove.")
Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants-Virginia, Inc.(Virginia CURE)
P.O. Box 19453 € Alexandria, VA 22320-0453
Phone and fax: 703/765-6549 € €web page: http://www.vacure.org
Yahoo Group: VirginiaPrisoners@***********.com
Reminders
Virginia CURE dues are payable on a calendar year basis - are tax deductible - mail to address above
Please designate your United Way contribution to Virginia CURE - No. 7315 - A Local Unaffilitated Charity, Combined Federal Campaign of the National Capital Area.
Please consider a contribution to Virginia CURE to purchase postage stamps for Virginia CURE's Christmas Cards to Prisoners Project. Cards will be prepared on December 14, 2002 - Volunteers call us at 703/765-6549.
----------
From: "Federal CURE, Inc." <director@fedcure.org>
Reply-To: FedCURE@***********.com
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 15:43:06 -0000
To: FedCURE@***********.com
Subject: [FedCURE] Supreme Court Case on Inmate Visiting Rights
Monday, December 2, 2002
Associated Press
Supreme Court agrees to consider limits on inmate visits
Also supporting Michigan were Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas.
The Supreme Court said Monday it will decide if inmates have
constitutional rights to jailhouse visits from young relatives and
others in a case that could have far-reaching implications for
prisons around the country.
The high court over the years has upheld restrictions on books,
packages and visitors at prisons.
Justices will consider whether Michigan went too far in banning
visits by some children and former prisoners and stripping
visitation privileges from drug-using inmates. An appeals court
sided with inmates, ruling earlier this year that imprisonment
doesn't erase a person's First Amendment right to associate with
others.
Michigan and 11 other states argued that the rules should be
reinstated. States and the federal government have varying
regulations for inmate visits, so the court's ultimate decision
will
clarify what's allowed.
The Michigan inmates' lawyer argued that Michigan had the harshest
visitation rules in the country, allowing someone to permanently
lose the right to see family members or friends after two drug or
alcohol infractions.
"This unique and extraordinarily harsh punishment had a devastating
effect on prisoners and their families," attorney Deborah LaBelle
told justices in a filing.
Justices must weigh Michigan authorities' ability to control their
prisons against the rights of inmates. States usually win in such
cases.
Michigan's rules ban visits from prisoners' minor relatives, like
brothers and sisters and nieces and nephews. Children and
grandchildren are allowed to come to the prison, unless the
parental
rights have been terminated.
Michigan Attorney General Jennifer Granholm told the court that the
rules were changed because of many visitation problems, including
the molestation of a child during a visit.
Michigan's rules were imposed in 1995 and challenged by a group of
inmates, including Michelle Bazzetta, who was convicted in the
death
of her then-husband's stepmother nearly 20 years ago.
"Under our constitution, even those lawfully imprisoned for serious
crimes retain some basic constitutional rights," the
Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said. "In the
present case, the regulations fall below minimum standards of
decency owed by a civilized society to those it has incarcerated."
The appeals court said the ban on visitors is cruel and unusual
punishment.
The last time the Supreme Court handled a major prison visitation
case was in 1989, also involving a case from the 6th Circuit.
Justices upheld Kentucky's visitation rules then.
Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar told the court that the
appeals court decision "is potentially disruptive to prison
management across the country." He said limits on visitation are
needed to encourage good behavior and control contraband, which can
be brought in by visitors.
The case is significant because there are 1.4 million inmates in
state and federal prisons.
Also supporting Michigan were Alabama, Idaho, Indiana,
Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Dakota,
and Texas.
Michigan rules also prohibit former prisoners who are not immediate
family from visiting. Prisoners who violate the department's drug
abuse policies twice are only allowed to be visited by attorneys
and
clergy.
The class-action lawsuit against Michigan did not challenge other
visitation rules, including a limit on monthly visits, regulations
on times and dates of visits.
The case is Overton v. Bazzetta, 02-94.
On the Net:
Supreme Court: www.supremecourtus.gov/