NCJ Number
122961
Journal
American Criminal Law Review Volume: 26 Issue: 4 Dated: (Spring 1989) Pages: 1323-1387
Date Published
1989
Length
65 pages
Annotation
This analysis of judicial decisions relating to inmate discipline concludes that the United States Supreme Court should expand the scope of procedural due process to protect the dignity of inmates who are accused of major disciplinary offenses.
Abstract
In 1974 the Court in Wolff v. McDonnell appeared to repudiate its longstanding policy of avoiding interference with the management of prisons by ruling that the disciplinary procedures of a Nebraska prison violated the Constitution. Five years later the British judiciary established the principle of judicial review of prison discipline in its decision in R. v. Hull Prison Board of Visitors, ex parte St. Germain (No. 2). The Wolff decision rested its application of the due process clause on a novel analysis of an inmates interest in liberty. In contrast, the British decision focused on natural justice. However, the Supreme Court has pursued a policy of wide-ranging deference to prison officials, and the Wolff decision has not prevented abuses of power by prison tribunals. Therefore, the Supreme Court should give the due process clause a broader application that is the equal of English natural justice. 508 footnotes.