Skip to content
Lawwise
    Lawwise

      Subjects

      This handbook

      Subject

      Correctional Law

      Grievance exhaustion before suit, disciplinary hearings and lost credit, conditions of confinement standards, medical care obligations, mail, publications and communication, classification and transfer, and parole and supervised release procedure.

      01
      Correctional Law

      Sentence Computation, Jail Credit and Earned Time

      Under 18 U.S.C. 3585 a sentence commences on the date the person is received into custody awaiting transportation to or arriving at the designated facility. Prior custody credit is given for time spent in official detention before the sentence commenced, as a result of the offense or of related conduct, but only where that time has not been credited against another sentence. Good conduct time under 18 U.S.C. 3624(b) and earned time credits then reduce the time actually served.

      6 min readFederal and state

      02
      Correctional Law

      Administrative and Disciplinary Segregation Compared

      Disciplinary segregation is a sanction imposed after a disciplinary finding, for a term set by the severity of the prohibited act, and it carries the full procedural protections owed at a hearing. Administrative detention is non-punitive placement pending investigation, transfer, classification or protection, and it requires only informal review with periodic reassessment. Under Sandin v. Conner a liberty interest arises where the restraint imposes atypical and significant hardship.

      6 min readFederal and state

      03
      Correctional Law

      Medical and Mental Health Care Obligations

      Estelle v. Gamble established that deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of prisoners constitutes the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain. The claim has two elements: a medical need serious enough that a physician would find treatment necessary or that a lay person would recognize it, and an official who knew of and disregarded the risk. Negligent diagnosis or treatment does not meet the standard, and a difference of opinion about the correct treatment does not either.

      6 min readFederal and state

      04
      Correctional Law

      Telephone and Electronic Communication Rules and Rates

      Communication from custody is monitored and recorded where notice has been given, on a consent theory supported by posted warnings, handbook provisions and recorded announcements. Calls to counsel may be placed unmonitored where arranged in advance under the institution's procedure. Rates and ancillary charges for calling services are federally regulated under authority in 47 U.S.C. 276, and electronic messaging is monitored rather than privileged.

      6 min readFederal and state

      05
      Correctional Law

      Grievance Exhaustion Before Suit, and What Counts as Available

      Under 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a) no action concerning prison conditions may be brought by a confined person until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted. Exhaustion must be proper: the grievance must comply with the institution's own deadlines and levels of appeal. The Supreme Court has identified three circumstances in which a remedy is unavailable, including a process that operates as a dead end, one so opaque that it cannot be used, and one thwarted by staff.

      6 min readFederal and state

      06
      Correctional Law

      Conditions of Confinement: The Two-Part Standard

      A conditions claim by a convicted person has an objective and a subjective element. The objective element asks whether the deprivation is sufficiently serious, measured against contemporary standards of decency and the denial of a basic human need. The subjective element requires deliberate indifference: the official knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to health or safety. For a person held before trial the claim rests on due process instead.

      6 min readFederal and state

      07
      Correctional Law

      Loss of Good Conduct Credit and Its Restoration

      Federal good conduct time is awarded under 18 U.S.C. 3624(b) at up to fifty-four days for each year of the sentence imposed. A disciplinary finding may disallow credit for the year in which the violation occurred or forfeit credit already vested, according to the severity of the act. Disallowed credit is generally not restorable; forfeited credit may be restored on application after a period of clear conduct.

      6 min readFederal and state

      08
      Correctional Law

      Mail, Publications and the Legitimate Penological Interest Test

      Turner v. Safley holds that a regulation impinging on the rights of a confined person is valid if reasonably related to legitimate penological interests, assessed through four factors: a rational connection to a neutral objective, alternative means of exercising the right, the cost of accommodation, and the absence of ready alternatives. Procunier v. Martinez applies a stricter test to outgoing mail, and legal mail has separate handling rules.

      6 min readFederal and state

      09
      Correctional Law

      Parole and Supervised Release: Conditions and Revocation

      Morrissey v. Brewer requires a two-stage process before revocation: a prompt preliminary hearing near the place of the alleged violation to determine probable cause, and a final revocation hearing with written notice, disclosure of evidence, an opportunity to be heard and confront adverse witnesses, a neutral body, and a written statement of the evidence and reasons. Supervised release is governed by 18 U.S.C. 3583, which sets the imprisonment a court may impose on revocation by offense class.

      6 min readFederal and state

      10
      Correctional Law

      Disciplinary Hearings: Notice, Evidence and the Standard

      Where a prison disciplinary sanction implicates a protected liberty interest, Wolff v. McDonnell requires written notice of the charges at least twenty-four hours before the hearing, an opportunity to call witnesses and present documents where consistent with safety, assistance in defined cases, an impartial decision maker, and a written statement of the evidence relied on. Superintendent v. Hill requires only that some evidence support the finding.

      6 min readFederal and state

      11
      Correctional Law

      Classification, Custody Levels and Transfer

      Classification assigns a security level to an institution and a custody level to a person, using scored factors including offense severity, sentence length, criminal history, detainers, escape history and institutional conduct. Scores are reviewed on a schedule. Under Meachum v. Fano a person has no liberty interest in confinement at a particular institution, so an ordinary transfer requires no hearing, though the score itself can be corrected administratively.

      6 min readState law