NCJ Number
85396
Date Published
1981
Length
308 pages
Annotation
This study focused on the implementation and impact of due process law on prison disciplinary practices and procedures.
Abstract
Two major due process rulings were examined: Wolff v. McDonnell, a 1974 Supreme Court decision, and Avant v. Clifford, a 1975 New Jersey Supreme Court ruling. In addition, information was gathered from observations and interviews with the staff and inmates of the Rahway State Prison in New Jersey over a period of 5.5 months. Documentary material was also gathered from the New Jersey Department of Corrections. Both of the court decisions tried to place procedural restraints upon the exercise of official discretion and to foster impartiality in the decisionmaking process. As a result of these rulings, the Rahway disciplinary system is characterized by formal, uniform procedures and a rationalized decisionmaking process for adjudicating inmate offenders. The level of compliance with the due process requirements of the two decisions is fairly high. However, the value of due process is compromised by the large numbers of disciplinary charges and by the institutional assumptions that create a serious credibility problem for inmates who receive disciplinary charges. At Rahway, due process means giving inmates the chance to prove their innocence within the context of institutional assumptions that make these efforts difficult, although not impossible. Tables, notes, and a list of 169 references are provided. (Author abstract modified)