This annual survey examines important prisoners' rights cases decided by the U.S. Courts of Appeals during 2012. These cases addressed constitutional questions concerning sexual misconduct, health care, custodial suicide, protections due informants, involuntary servitude, First Amendment freedoms, and solitary confinement. In addressing these constitutional questions, the U.S. Courts of Appeals created new law and/or applied clearly established law. Because the U.S. Supreme Court will only rarely grant certiorari to appellants, the U.S. Courts of Appeals remain the de facto courts of last resort for all but a few prisoners who challenge the constitutionality of the manner of their confinement.
BaussanoI.WilliamsB. G.NunnP.BeggiatoM.FedellU.ScanoF. (2010). Tuberculosis incidence in prisons: A systematic review. PLos Medicine, 7, 1–10.
2.
BeckA. J.JohnsonC. (2012). National former prisoners survey 2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
3.
Bistrian v. Levi, 696 F.3d 352 (3d Cir. 2012).
4.
BranhamL. S. (2004). “Go sin no more”: The constitutionality of governmentally funded faith-based prison units. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 37, 291–352.
5.
BuchananK. S. (2012). Engendering rape. UCLA Law Review, 59, 1630–1688.
6.
Cash v. County of Erie. (2009). WL 3199558 (W.D.N.Y. 2009).
7.
CoganB. A. (2012). Public health consequences of denying access to justice for victims of prison staff sexual misconduct. UCLA Women’s Law Journal, 18, 195–237.
8.
CohenF. (2012). Remarks of Fred Cohen. Correctional Law Reporter, 24, 39–40.
9.
CrossF. (2007). Decision making in the U. S. courts of appeals. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
10.
ColangeloF.HoganM. (1993). Jails and prisons, reservoirs of TB disease: Should defendants with HIV infection (who cannot swim) be thrown into the reservoir?Fordham Urban Law Journal, 20, 467–496.
11.
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976).
12.
Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994).
13.
Federal Bureau of Prisons. (2009). Clinical practice guidelines, Detoxification of chemically dependent inmates. Retrieved January 2, 2013, fromhttp://www.bop.gov/news/PDFs/detoxification.pdf
14.
FellnerJ. (2006). A corrections quandary: Mental illness and prison rules. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 41, 391–412.
GuQ.DillonC. F.BurtV. L. (2010, September). Prescription drug use continues to increase: U.S. prescription drug data for 2007-2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved December 28, 2012, fromhttp://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db42.htm
20.
HayesL. M. (2010). National study of jail suicides: 20 years later. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.
21.
Holloway v. Magness, 2011 WL 204891 (E.D. Ark. 2011).
22.
Holloway v. Magness, 666 F.3d 1076 (8th Cir. 2012).
23.
Hudson v. McMillian, 547 U.S. 586 (2006).
24.
IddingsB. (2006). The big disconnect: Will anyone answer the call to lower excessive prisoner telephone rates?North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology, 8, 159–203.
25.
Jordan v. Gardner, 986 F.2d 1521 (9th Cir. 1993) (en banc).
26.
KesslerR. G.RoebuckJ. B. (1996). Snitch. In McShaneM. D.WilliamsF. D. III (Eds.), Encyclopedia of American prisons (p. 449). New York, NY: Garland.
27.
King v. Kramer, 680 F.3d 1013 (7th Cir. 2012).
28.
KirklinJ. T. (2011). Title VII protection for inmates: A model approach for safeguarding civil rights in America’s prisons. Columbia Law Review, 111, 1048–1089.
29.
Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. 269 (D.N.H. 1977).
30.
Lobozzo v. Colorado Department of Corrections, 429 Fed. Appx. 707 (10th Cir. 2011).
31.
Lukert v. Dodge County, 684 F.3d 808 (8th Cir. (2012).
32.
McCaster v. Clausen, 684 F.3d 740 (7th Cir. 2012).
33.
McGarry v. Pallito, 687 F.3d 505 (2d Cir. 2012).
34.
McGinnis v. Royster, 410 U.S. 263 (1973).
35.
McleodJ. S. (2009). Anxiety, despair, and the maddening isolation of solitary confinement: Invoking the first amendment’s protection against state action that invades the sphere of the intellect and spirit. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 79, 647–676.
36.
Mikeska v. Collins, 928 F.2d 126 (5th Cir. 1991).
37.
Munson v. Gaetz, 673 F.3d 630 (7th Cir. 2012).
38.
MushlinM. (2009). Rights of prisoners (4th ed.). St. Paul, MN: West.
39.
O’HearM. M. (2007). The second chance act and the future of reentry reform. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 20, 75–83.
40.
O’Lone v. Estate of Shabazz, 482 U.S. 32 (1987).
41.
Overton v. Bazzetta, 539 U.S. 126 (2003).
42.
Piatt v. MacDougall, 773 F.2d 1032 (9th Cir.1985).
43.
PontJ.StoverH.WolffH. (2012). Dual loyalty in prison health. American Journal of Public Health, 102, 475–479.
Reassessing solitary confinement (2012, June 19). The human rights, fiscal and public safety consequence: Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights of the Senate Judiciary Committee, 112th Congress. Retrieved January 14, 2003, fromhttp://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=6517e7d97c06eac4ce9f60b09625ebe8
46.
Rezaq v. Nalley, 677 F.3d 1001 (10th Cir. 2012).
47.
Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (1981).
48.
RobertsonJ. E. (2001–2002). The jurisprudence of the PLRA: Inmates as ‘outsiders’ and the countermajoritarian difficulty. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 92, 187–210.
49.
RobertsonJ. E. (2006). The Rehnquist Court and the ‘‘Turnerization’’ of prisoners’ rights. New York City Law Review, 10, 97–125.
50.
RothW. M. (1989). Turner v. Safley: The Supreme Court further confuses prisoners' constitutional rights. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 22, 667–715.
51.
RovnerL. (2012). Remarks of Laura Rovner. Correctional Law Reporter, 24, 37–38, 40.
52.
Sandin v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472 (1995).
53.
Serra v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir. 2010).
54.
Sharp v. Johnson, 2008 WL 941686 (W.D. Pa. 2008).
55.
Sharp v. Johnson, 669 F.3d 144 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 41 (2012).
56.
Shaw v. Murphy, 532 U.S. 223 (2001).
57.
ShultsP. R. (2012). Calling the Supreme Court: Prisoners right to telephone use. Boston University Law Review, 92, 369–403.
58.
SilbermanM. (1995). A world of violence. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
59.
SmithC. (2009). Sandra Day O'Connor and corrections law. Hamline Law Review, 32, 477–497.
60.
Somers v. Thurman, 109 F.3d 614 (9th Cir. 1997).
61.
SykesG. (1958). Society of captives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
62.
TachikiS. N. (1995). Indeterminate sentences in supermax prisons based upon alleged gang affiliations: A reexamination of procedural protection and a proposal for greater procedural requirements. California Law Review, 83, 1115–1149.
63.
ThompsonJ. H. (2010). Today’s deliberate indifference: Providing attention without providing treatment to prisoners with serious medical needs. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 45, 635–654.
64.
Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401 (1989).
65.
TrossmanS. (2011, November–December). Ensuring standards are standards behind bars: Nurses work to review ANA document, promote corrections nursing practice. American Nurse, 43, 12–13.
66.
Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987).
67.
U.S. Department of Justice. (2012, May 16). National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape. 28 CFR Part 115, Docket No. OAG131; AG Order No. RIN 1105-AB34. Retrieved January 21, 2013, fromhttp://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/programs/pdfs/prea_final_rule.pdf
68.
Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2012).
69.
WestoffM. (2008). An examination of prisoners’ constitutional right to health care: Theory and practice. Health Lawyer, 20, 1–12.
70.
Wood v. Beauclair, 692 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2012).
71.
Wood v. Idaho Department of Corrections, 2009 WL 3104036 (D. Idaho2009).
