NCJ Number
58347
Journal
University of Toledo Law Review Volume: 10 Issue: 2 Dated: (WINTER 1979) Pages: 493-518
Date Published
1979
Length
26 pages
Annotation
COURT DECISIONS CONCERNING THE RIGHTS OF PRETRIAL DETAINEES AND THEIR CONDITION IN DETENTION FACILITIES LEADS TO THE ARGUMENT THAT A WELL-REASONED STANDARD BASED ON DUE PROCESS RIGHTS BE ADOPTED.
Abstract
ALTHOUGH THE MAJORITY OF FEDERAL COURTS HAVE RECOGNIZED THE NEED TO DEFEND THE RIGHTS OF DETAINEES, THE DECISION BY THE FIRST CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, IN THE CASE OF FEELEY V. SAMPSON, (1978), POINTS OUT THE NEED TO DEVELOP A UNIFORM POLICY ON THIS ISSUE. THE STATUS OF THOSE PERSONS CONFINED WHILE AWAITING TRIAL DIFFERS SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THAT OF INMATES WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF CRIMES. EVEN THOUGH THE SUPREME COURT HAS NOT RULED ON THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH PRETRIAL DETAINEES MAY BE CONFINED, IT HAS ACTED TO ENSURE THAT PRISON OFFICIALS PROTECT BASIC RIGHTS OF INMATES SUCH AS EFFECTIVE ACCESS TO THE COURTS. FEDERAL COURTS HAVE ADOPTED STRICT TESTS UNDER EQUAL PROTECTION AND DUE PROCESS TO FULLY PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF PRETRIAL DETAINEES, WHEREAS THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT HAS BEEN USED LESS OFTEN. IN THE FEELEY DECISION, THE COURT DECLINED TO FOLLOW THE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY OTHER FEDERAL COURTS AND DEFERRED INSTEAD TO THE JUDGEMENT OF PRISON OFFICIALS. A 'REASONABLENESS' STANDARD AS ADOPTED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN CASES CONCERNING CONVICTED INMATES AND PERSONS DETAINED IN MENTAL HOSPITALS WAS USED. HOWEVER, SUCH A STANDARD SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED TO THE DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT CONDITIONS PRESENT FOR PRETRIAL DETAINEES. THE USE OF SUCH A STANDARD WOULD DENY PRETRIAL DETAINEES THEIR BASIC RIGHTS AS INNOCENT PEOPLE. THE MOST PRINCIPLED STANDARD FOR THE PROTECTION OF PRETRIAL DETAINEES APPEARS TO BE THE 'LEAST RESTRICTIVE ALTERNATIVE' TEST, BASED ON THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF DETAINEES. THIS STANDARD PROVIDES FOR THE PRACTICAL NECESSITIES OF PRISON ADMINISTRATION, WHILE ENSURING THE RIGHTS OF DETAINEES. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (KCP)