NCJ Number
12927
Journal
St John's Law Review Volume: 48 Issue: 1 Dated: (OCTOBER 1973) Pages: 104-124
Date Published
1973
Length
21 pages
Annotation
DISCUSSION OF THE 1973 SUPREME COURT DECISION HOLDING THAT INMATES MAY NOT USE A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION IF THE REMEDY SOUGHT INVOLVES A RELEASE FROM CUSTODY.
Abstract
UNTIL THE PREISER DECISION, PRISONERS WERE ABLE TO ATTACK ALLEGEDLY UNLAWFUL CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT WITH A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION UNDER SECTION 1983 OF TITLE 18 OF THE U.S. CODE. THE ADVANTAGE OF THE 1983 ACTION WAS THAT IT DID NOT REQUIRE THE TIME-CONSUMING EXHAUSTION OF STATE REMEDIES WHICH IS A PEREREQUISITE TO HABEAS CORPUS RELIEF. IN PREISER V. RODRIGUEZ, THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONFINEMENT COMPLAINED OF IN A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION WAS THE DEPRIVATION OF GOOD TIME. THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT SINCE THE REMEDY REQUESTED WOULD INVOLVE A RELEASE FROM CUSTODY, THE PROPER ACTION MUST BE HABEAS CORPUS. THIS DECISION IS CRITICIZED AS A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF THE TWO REMEDIES, AS ADDING UNNECESSARY COMPLICATIONS TO THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS, AND AS DEPRIVING PRISONERS OF A VALID AND USEFUL TOOL TO PROTEST CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES WHERE ONLY ONE OF THE DESIRED RESULTS IS RELEASE FROM CUSTODY.