Olivia Kelman and Joshua Carpenter, K&L Gates. Courtesy photos

PRO BONO

Olivia Kelman and Joshua Carpenter

K&L Gates

A rule enforced by the state Department of Corrections banned facial hair longer than one-half inch, but that policy conflicted with a Muslim tenet that men should grow beards the length of a fist.

Muslim inmate Durrell Sims asked a federal judge in a pro se filing to allow him to grow a longer beard under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The court asked for help from law firms, and the K&L Gates attorneys took the case to trial pro bono.

It ended up being the first trial for both associates. They had six months to prepare for the two-day bench trial.

U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle concluded the beard requested by Sims "would pose no security, misconduct or flight risk" and "will not compromise the department's compelling interests."

He ordered the department in August to allow Sims to follow his religious beliefs on his beard and mustache and issued an injunction to enforce his order,

Describe a key piece of testimony, evidence, ruling or order in your case and how it influenced the outcome: With minimal physical evidence available, this case hinged almost entirely on the witnesses' testimony, so credibility was of paramount importance.

Carpenter and Kelman focused their client's testimony on the devoutness of his Muslim beliefs, the steps he took to practice his religion while incarcerated and his near-perfect disciplinary record. The court found Sims credible as a sincere Muslim and "near-model inmate" who presented minimal risk to the state.

The court also had to weigh the directly competing testimony of plaintiff's prison security expert, Tim Gravette, against the state's expert, former Assistant Corrections Secretary James Upchurch. Kelman and Carpenter convincingly presented Gravette's testimony that a large majority of prisons already allow fist-length beards with minimal adverse impact and highlighted Gravette's extensive experience safely and effectively searching long beards without incident at the U.S. Bureau of Prisons.

They also used contradictory prior testimony from Upchurch in a similar case to impeach his credibility regarding the state's need for the challenged regulation.

The court ultimately found Gravette to be more credible and credited "Gravette's testimony over the conflicting testimony of the department's witnesses," which turned out to be the key to victory in the case.