NCJ Number
104805
Journal
New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement Volume: 12 Issue: 2 Dated: (Summer 1986) Pages: 197-328
Date Published
1986
Length
130 pages
Annotation
The Michigan and Illinois prison disciplinary processes are analyzed and compared regarding their compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Wolff v. McDonnell, which held that inmates must be accorded certain procedural due process rights before losing good-conduct credits for major misconduct.
Abstract
The safeguards mandated by the Court include the right to written notice of a charge within 24 hours of a hearing, the right to call witnesses and present evidence when this does not threaten correctional goals, the right to reasonable assistance when preparing and presenting a defense, the right to a written statement of the evidence supporting the charge, and the right to have the charge adjudicated by an impartial decisionmaker. The review of the disciplinary procedures as adopted and followed in Michigan focuses on pertinent State statutes, administrative regulations, other administrative provisions, and the procedures followed at disciplinary hearings at two selected prisons. The analysis of the Illinois disciplinary procedures focuses on pertinent statutory and regulatory provisions and part of the administrative records of some disciplinary cases which were the subject of litigation. A comparison of the two systems against the rights mandated in 'Wolff' indicates that Michigan, with one exception, substantially complies with the Court's ruling and oftentimes surpasses it. Illinois' compliance, however, is substantially in doubt. Appended sample forms from the disciplinary systems of the two States and 654 footnotes.