PRISONER'S RIGHT TO STAY WHERE HE IS - STATE AND FEDERAL TRANSFER COMPACTS RUN AFOUL OF CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS

• NCJ Number: 17845
• Journal: Capital University Law Review Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Dated: (1974) Pages: 223-243
• Author(s): M A MILLEMANN; S J MILLEMANN
• Date Published: 1974
• Length: 21 pages
• Corporate Author: Capital University Law Review
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

EXAMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT INMATES MAY BE TRANSFERRED FROM THE CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM OF ONE STATE TO THAT OF ANOTHER FOR ALLEGED MISCONDUCT WITHOUT A HEARING.

Abstract

DISCUSSED ARE THE LEGAL CHALLENGES TO THESE SUMMARY INTERSTATE TRANSFERS BASED ON THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT RULING IN MORRISEY V. BREWER (1972) THAT PAROLEES ARE ENTITLED TO A FAIR ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING INCORPORATING THE RUDIMENTS OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS PRIOR TO THE REVOCATION OF THEIR PAROLE. ALL INMATE LITIGATION CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF SUMMARY INTERSTATE INMATE TRANSFERS HAVE ARGUED THAT THEY CONSTITUTE 'GRIEVOUS LOSS' AND THAT THE FAILURE TO AFFORD THE TRANSFERRED INMATE A HEARING TO CONTEST HIS TRANSFER IS NEITHER IN THE STATE'S INTERESTS NOR CONSISTENT WITH THE GOAL OF REHABILITATION. THE SCOPE AND NATURE OF THE INJURIES SUFFERED BY TRANSFERRED INMATES ARE IDENTIFIED AND DISCUSSED AND INCLUDE SEPARATION FROM FAMILY AND FRIENDS, SEPARATION FROM COUNSEL, THE MAXIMUM SECURITY OR SOLITARY CONFINEMENT FOLLOWING TRANSFERS, INTERRUPTION OF REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMS, INJURY TO PAROLE OPPORTUNITIES, POSSIBLE REVOCATION OF 'GOOD TIME', AND THE NEGATIVE EMOTIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT TRANSFERS HAVE ON THE INMATES' INTEGRATION INTO THE NEW PRISON COMMUNITY. THE AUTHORS ALSO ARGUE THAT THE ELEMENTS OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS ARE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH LEGITIMATE STATE INTERESTS, SUCH AS THE NEED FOR BROAD DISCRETION ON THE PART OF PRISON OFFICIALS, TRANSFERS NECESSITATED BY EMERGENCY CONDITIONS, AND MAINTENANCE OF PRISON SECURITY. THEY POINT OUT THAT COURT DECISIONS IN THIS AREA HAVE HELD THAT THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT GUARANTEES INMATES THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING PRIOR TO, OR SOON AFTER, THEIR TRANSFER FROM THE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION OF ONE STATE TO ANOTHER. THE AUTHORS CONTEND THAT THIS REPRESENTS A BALANCING OF THE INTERESTS OF THE PRISONER AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF THE STATE.