by David M. Reutter

A Pennsylvania U.S. District Court has granted absolute judicial immunity to two former state court judges in a consolidated class-action civil rights suit. That immunity, however, only applied to judicial acts, allowing the case to proceed on the judges’ corrupt actions that were administrative in nature.

The lawsuit accuses Michael T. Conahan and Mark A. Ciavarella, Jr. of abusing their positions as judges of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas by accepting approximately $2.8 million in payoffs. The conspiracy involved the judges tak-ing bribes from the owners of the privately-operated Pennsylvania Child Care (PACC) and Western Pennsylvania Child Care (WPACC) detention facilities, and intentionally filling those facilities with juvenile offenders to generate profit.

The conspiracy also included Robert Powell, Robert Mericle, Mericle Construction, Pinacle Group of Jupiter LCC, Beverage Marketing of PA, and Vision Holdings.

Conahan used his judicial position to remove funding from the Luzerne Court detention facility, then “exerted influence to facilitate the construction, expansion and lease of the PACC facility.” On Luzerne County’s behalf, he signed a secret “Placement Guarantee Agreement” with PACC. He also granted an injunction to prevent the results of a Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare audit of PACC ...

In May 2010, Prison Legal News announced that it had prevailed in a public records lawsuit filed against Florida-based GEO Group (formerly Wackenhut Corrections), the nation’s second-largest private prison company.

PLN filed the suit in 2005 under Florida’s public records law after GEO failed to produce documents related to contractual ...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (DC) Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal of a prisoner’s lawsuit for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and for conceding summary judgment by failing to respond to the defendants’ summary judgment motion.

The District of Columbia contracted with Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) to house DC prisoners at CCA fa-cilities in Ohio and Arizona. TransCor, a CCA subsidiary, was responsible for transporting prisoners to and from those facilities.

DC prisoner Ismail Malik was confined at a CCA prison in Youngstown, Ohio until he and other prisoners were trans-ported by TransCor on July 2-4, 2001 on a forty-hour bus ride to CCA’s Arizona facility. According to transport officers, the transfer was punishment for the prisoners’ membership in a class-action lawsuit against CCA and DC officials. [See: PLN, Aug. 1999, p.14]

During the bus ride the prisoners were handcuffed at the waist with a belly chain that was attached to another prisoner’s chain, and they all wore leg shackles. It was impossible for the prisoners to use the restroom due to the restraints, forcing them to urinate and defecate on themselves. The restraints also prevented Malik from using his asthma inhaler, and ...

U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert E. Larsen has recommended the denial of a motion to suppress phone recordings of a plot to harm a federal witness obtained by the government through a Rule 17 subpoena without a court order.

While awaiting trial on various federal charges, Gary Eye in concert with his wife, Stephanie Eye, allegedly plotted to harm a federal witness. The alleged plot was uncovered by an informant at a CCA facility who notified the FBI.

The grand jury issued a subpoena to CCA for phone conversations made by Eye. CCA turned the conversations over to the government, but the discs also contained recordings of calls between Eye and his lawyer. The attorney calls were not segregated.

Prior to trial, the government sent a Rule 17 subpoena to CCA for additional phone conversations made by Eye. CCA complied with the subpoena, turning over additional recordings on disc.

Eye moved to suppress the burden of recordings obtained via the Rule 17 subpoena, arguing that the government had failed to obtain a court order for the subpoena. The court found that the government had failed to comply with Rule 17, but Eye suffered no prejudice from the government’s error.

See: United ...

On September 11, 2009, Iraqi citizens, Haidar Muhsin Saleh and Ilam Nassir Ibrahim, lost their appeal to the District of Columbia Circuit in regard to lawsuits filed against two private military contractors. The two men represented a group of plaintiffs who alleged they or their relatives were subjected to various abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison complex in Iraq by employees of Titan Corporation and CACI International.

The district court granted summary judgment to Titan due to the federal preemption of the state tort claims. Summary judgment was denied, however, to CACI. These rulings were based on the court's determination that Titan's employees were "fully integrated into [their] military units" with which they functioned as "soldiers in all but name." The CACI employees, on the other hand, ostensibly retained some measure of autonomy, as evidenced by the dual chain of command they were subject to.

On appeal, the D.C. Circuit questioned the extent to which the CACI employees were under the "operational control" of the military and determined that although the employees received "advice and feedback" from CACI, they were "melded into a military mission" that would entitle them to the same summary judgment granted Titan. Therefore, the district court's ...

by Matt Clarke

In September 2009, Alaskan officials denied a protest filed by Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), which was the final hurdle before awarding Cornell Corrections of Alaska (a subsidiary of Cornell Corrections) a contract worth $19,446,000 to house up to 900 Alaskan prisoners in an out-of-state private prison.

CCA had held the contract since 1994 and was paid $20,669,000 last year to house Alaskan prisoners at its Red Rock Correctional Center in Arizona. In December 2009, the 770 prisoners at Red Rock were transported to Cornell’s new l,250-bed Hudson Correctional Facility in Colorado.

Cornell’s subsidiary received special bidding preference because it was an Alaska-based company. CCA had bid $18,724,000 per year for the three-year contract, and filed a protest against awarding the contract to Cornell Alaska because it had used its Texas-based parent company as the qualified service provider. CCA claimed that Cornell Alaska, which manages Alaskan halfway houses, would not otherwise have had the requisite experience to perform under the contract. CCA also maintained that if Cornell Alaska had to depend on its parent company, then it was no longer entitled to preference as an Alaskan company and CCA’s low bid should have won. Alaska’s Department of ...

The Ninth Circuit held on Oct. 30, 2009 that the Receiver appointed by a federal court to oversee delivery of medical care to prisoners in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) was not immune from an official-capacity lawsuit for damages. The lawsuit alleged that the Receiver had breached a contract with Medical Development International (MDI), a Florida-based company that provided medical services at two CDCR prisons but did not get paid for much of its work.

Responding to what it characterized as an “unconscionable degree of suffering and death,” in June 2005 the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California established a receivership to overhaul the delivery of medical services to CDCR prisoners. [See: PLN, Mar. 2006, p.1]. The court subsequently entered a separate order authorizing the CDCR to contract with third-party medical service providers without competitive bidding.

In that context the CDCR entered into a relationship with MDI, and, despite the absence of a finalized negotiated contract, permitted the company to provide services at two facilities – the California State Prison in Los Angeles and the California Correctional Institution in Tehachapi.

Later, when the CDCR became concerned that MDI was not licensed to practice medicine ...

On October 1, 2009, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) entered into a consent decree with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to settle allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation involving female employees at the company’s Crowley County Correctional Facility (CCCF) in Colorado.

In September 2006, the EEOC filed a lawsuit ...

by David M. Reutter, Gary Hunter & Brandon Sample

Prison food. The very words conjure images of unidentifiable mystery meat, chili-mac, watery oatmeal and creamed chipped beef – the latter being commonly, though not very appetizingly, known as “shit on a shingle” in jailhouse parlance.

Before someone goes to prison or jail, what they eat is usually taken for granted. But behind bars, food becomes a serious issue. With the trend towards privatizing prison food services, plus economic pressures on state and local governments, there are growing concerns as to whether prisoners are receiving nutritionally adequate diets.

When confronted with jail or prison cuisine, prisoners have only three options: eating what is served or buying overpriced food items from the institutional canteen or commissary, assuming they have sufficient funds, or stealing prison food and preparing it themselves. Most prisons and jails use a rotating menu for their meals, with the same foods being served on a regular cycle. Others plan meals according to whatever foodstuffs can be purchased at the lowest price.

Over the past decade, prison and jail officials have been turning to private for-profit companies to cut the cost of feeding prisoners. Leading the way in contracted food ...

Oklahoma judges are pushing for larger fines imposed on criminal defendants to compensate for a shortfall in courthouse budgets.

The downturn in the economy has affected almost everyone, and the courts are no exception. Judges in Oklahoma have seen a 7 percent decrease in state funding for court operations. To deal with that shortfall, they are being encouraged to increase financial penalties and not forgive court costs. Further, offenders who receive probation are being required to pay larger fines.

The push to increase fines and ensure collection of court costs is being spearheaded by the Oklahoma Supreme Court. During workshops sponsored by the Supreme Court, judges have been encouraged to get “defendants to pay their fines, fees, and costs by credit card,” and to reject plea agreements that include low fines.

“I would suggest to you that a plea bargain that does not take into consideration the court which must accept it, ratify it and enforce it is one that should be looked at askance,” Chief Justice James E. Edmondson told judges in a pre-recorded video during the workshops.

Even crime victims are being put at the back of the line. During one workshop, judges were told they should reject ...