U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert E. Larsen has recommended the denial of a motion to suppress audio recordings obtained by the United States from CCA that contained attorney-client communications.

While awaiting trial on federal charges, Gary Eye allegedly conspired to have several government witnesses murdered. Eye allegedly discussed the plot over the telephone at a CCA facility. The government obtained copies of Eye’s phone calls from CCA, but the recordings CCA turned over contained calls Eye made to his attorney, and these calls were not segregated on the disc.

Eye moved to suppress the recordings CCA produced, arguing that they violated his Sixth Amendment rights. Judge Larsen disagreed, finding that Eye “failed to satisfy his burden of proving a violation and resulting prejudice.”

Eye had consented to the calls’ monitoring, Larsen concluded, because the phones clearly indicated all calls were monitored. Furthermore, because the government never listened to any attorney-client communications, Eye could not show prejudice. See: United States v. Eye, USDC, W.D. Mo., No. 05-00344-01-CR-W-ODS (2008).

Division One of the Washington State Court of Appeals has held that recording a prisoner’s jail telephone conversations does not violate privacy interests under the Washington Constitution, article 1, section 7.

Before the Court was the appeal of Michael E. Archie, who challenged the use of recordings of his jail telephone conversations at his trial on burglary in the first degree and assault in the second degree. He argued that using these recordings as evidence intruded on his protected “private affairs” under the state constitution, which provides significantly greater protection than the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Court of Appeals disagreed. While “Washington has a long history of extending strong protections to telephonic communications,” those protections do not apply to detention settings. This distinction is exhibited in the Privacy Act, Chapter 9.73 RCW, which prohibits the interception or recording of private communications transmitted by telephone unless all parties to the communication consent. In contrast, there is no similar provision for telephone calls from prisoners in local jails.

Moreover, there are security needs to monitor prisoner communications. The telephones at the King County Jail inform prisoners of this likelihood, and when the recipient accepted the call in the face ...

Monday 12 October 2009

by: Matt Renner, t r u t h o u t | Report

President Obama promised to usher in a new era of government transparency when he was sworn into office nine months ago.

On January 21, Obama signed an executive order instructing all federal agencies and departments to "adopt a presumption in favor" of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and promised to make the federal government more transparent.

"The government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed or because of speculative or abstract fears," Obama's order said. "In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies should act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are servants of the public."

But since that time, the Obama administration has sought to conceal information in several high-profile court cases, in an effort that civil libertarians say amounts to covering up crimes committed by the Bush administration.

Last week, in a federal courthouse in New York, Obama's Justice Department attorneys again argued in favor of secrecy. The case involved 23 lawyers representing detainees at Guantánamo Bay who alleged ...

On April 15, 2009, the Mississippi Legislature passed legislation authorizing up to 25 percent, or $25,000 annually, of the money collected from prisoner telephone calls to fund a Jail and Prison Ministry.

Since the late 1990s, the Good News Jail and Prison Ministry has provided church services at the Lauderdale County Jail, funded entirely by donations. In 2007, however, the Lauderdale County Board of Supervisors requested the introduction of legislation to divert prison phone revenues, through December 31, 2011, to the chaplaincy to pay for a full-time Chaplain, and non-denominational worship services.

Sheriff Billy Sollie believes the jail ministry is important because it gives “hope of changing the heart and mind of those individuals who have chosen to prey on society, and provides them with hope for the future.” Sollie touted Ronny Shack, one of the first prisoners to join the jail ministry, as a chaplaincy success story. Sollie is convinced that Shack is now reformed, owning a local business, the Rib Shack, which provides catering for jail ministry fundraisers. “He acknowledges the message he received has led him to where he’s at today,” said Sollie.

Source: Senate Bill No. 3184 (2009), www.meridianstar.com

An investigation by the California Bureau of State Audits has revealed that Prison Health Care Services, the office overseeing prison health care reform in California, violated legal requirements and bypassed internal controls when it acquired $26.7 million in information technology (“IT”) goods and services without inviting competitive bids. The investigation, conducted by state Auditor Elaine M. Howle pursuant to the California Whistleblower Protection Act, was initiated when, shortly after his appointment in January 2008, J. Clark Kelso, the office’s new receiver, discovered that some of the IT contracts executed during his predecessor’s tenure may not have followed appropriate state laws and policies. Coincidentally, Kelso had gained familiarity with IT contracting problems of a similar nature during his tenure as California’s Chief Information officer (prior to his federal-court-appointment as Receiver). In responding to the audit, Kelso noted that, “For better or for worse,” his predecessor had devoted the bulk of the resources of the receiver’s office to addressing the very immediate problems posed by “abhorrent clinical conditions on the ground in the prisons.” Kelso acknowledged that, as a consequence, perhaps not enough attention had been paid to the administration of the state’s contracting system -- a system which he characterized as ...

by Matt Clarke

A review conducted by a Houston newspaper concluded that a large quantity and variety of contraband is still being smuggled into Texas prisons by state prison guards, and those caught smuggling rarely receive harsh punishment.

Between 2003 and 2008, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) brought contraband-related disciplinary action against 263 employees. Of those, 75% received probation, 35 were fired and 26 received no punishment. The only employee who was criminally prosecuted and convicted did not receive prison time.

Contraband smuggling is “the biggest security problem the prisons face,” according to John Moriarty, TDCJ’s Inspector General. “One corrupt employee can really compromise the security of the operation tremendously ... they can keep bringing and bringing stuff in.”

That issue made headlines after a guard allegedly smuggled a cell phone onto death row and condemned prisoner Richard Lee Tabler used it to place harassing calls to state Senator John Whitmire. The resulting political brouhaha led to a system-wide 10-day shakedown in October 2008, plus the implementation of new procedures for searching all persons entering TDCJ facilities, including guards. [See: PLN, March 2009, p.29].

Nonetheless, more than 200 cell phones were discovered in state prisons in the five ...

by David M. Reutter

Florida’s Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA) has issued a report that finds that oversight of the state’s private prisons has strengthened under the Department of Management Services (DMS) but significant weakness still abounds.

The Florida Legislature authorized private prisons in 1989. When the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) had not contracted for any privatization by 1993, the Legislature established the Correctional Privatization Commission to realize the savings that are ballyhooed by privatization advocates. As PLN previously reported, the Commission’s first executive director was fined and fired for ethics violations and the second imprisoned for embezzlement of state funds.

That prompted the legislature to abolish the Commission and place responsibility for private prison contracting and oversight under the charge of DMS. Of the 19 states to have private prisons, only Florida places administrative responsibility for private prisons outside of its prison agency or a prison commission overseeing both public and private prison systems.

As of October 1, 2008, Florida’s six private prisons housed 7,725 of the state’s 99,048 prisoners at an approximate annual cost of $133 million. By Florida law, private prisons must save 7% of the cost of operating a comparable state ...

On July 1, 2008, an Illinois Court of Appeals held that a prisoner had standing to bring a claim against Ameritech for consumer fraud. Johnnie Flournoy, an Illinois state prisoner at the Joliet Correctional Center, filed suit against Ameritech in state court alleging the company had “deliberately terminated his collect calls prematurely,” forcing him to call the same party again.

As a consequence, his family members were charged multiple surcharges and fees for accepting his collect calls. Furthermore, because Flournoy sent his mother money to pay for the calls he made, he suffered damages personally. The trial court dismissed the complaint with prejudice.

The Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal, finding that Flournoy had stated a cause of action under the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, 815 ILCS 505/1, et seq. In doing so, it “settled a question of fact – did Flournoy sufficiently allege that he suffered actual damages as a result of Ameritech’s alleged deceptive practices.” See: Flournoy v. Ameritech, 351 Ill.App.3d 583 (Ill.App.Ct. 3d Dist. 2004), appeal denied. [PLN, Dec. 2004, p.31].

Upon remand, the trial court granted Ameritech’s motion to dismiss for lack of standing to pursue a consumer fraud case. Flournoy appealed. The Court of Appeals ...

by John E. Dannenberg

The Nebraska Court of Appeals has upheld administrative regulation 205.3 (AR 205.3) of the Department of Correctional Services (DCS), which restricts prisoner phone calls to land-line, nonconference-call recipients and authorizes tape-recording of all non-attorney phone calls. In reversing an earlier district court injunction enjoining AR 205.3, the appellate court found that DCS’s new telephone system was the least restrictive means of accomplishing DCS’s goals of prison safety and security, and did not infringe upon prisoners’ constitutional rights.

In August 1997, Barry McCroy and other Nebraska prisoners sued DCS in state district court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for both injunctive relief and damages in regard to DCS’s new restrictive telephone program, the Inmate Calling System (IMS). The IMS established calling schedules and tape recording procedures for all prison phone calls except confidential attorney-client calls (defined as calls to court clerks, bailiffs and bar attorneys). Three-way calls, conference calls and call forwarding were prohibited. Additionally, the IMS limited prisoners to 20 pre-approved numbers and excluded all calls to cell phones, pagers, 800/900 numbers, 411 information numbers, state senators and the media.

In October 1997, the district court entered an injunction barring implementation of the IMS as it ...

The State of Connecticut in the early 1980s agreed to settle a suit over the overcrowding at the Somers Correctional Facility.

Joseph Letezeio individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated at Somers sued the State of Connecticut alleging that the overcrowding and other conditions at Somers violated the Eighth Amendment.

The State settled the suit agreeing to, among other things, eliminate dormitory housing in a former card room, cap housing in each cell to no more than two prisoners, provide indoor and outdoor recreation, one telephone call per week, improved visitation, routine sick call, and the creation of an admission and orientation program. The plaintiffs were represented by the Connecticut Civil Liberties Union. See: Letezeio v. Manson, USDC, D. Conn., No. H82-252.