Judges Are Urged to Reduce California's Inmate Population Amid Pandemic
Attorneys from the Prison Law Office and Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld are asking the judges for an emergency order freeing, or possibly relocating, an unspecified number of elderly and ailing inmates.
April 02, 2020 at 07:49 PM
4 minute read
A panel of federal judges Thursday heard the pleas of attorneys for state inmates who say California is not doing enough to keep the coronavirus from ravaging its prison population.
Attorneys from the Prison Law Office and Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld are asking the judges for an emergency order freeing, or possibly relocating, an unspecified number of elderly and ailing inmates as well as those who are approaching their scheduled release dates. Such an action would modify a 2009 order that capped the statewide prison population at 138% of its designed capacity.
That order "has proven inadequate to ensure that minimal constitutional care can be provided in the current pandemic," Prison Law Office attorney Sara Norman said.
State and federal courts around the nation have grappled with balancing inmates' health concerns with public safety as health authorities call for increased physical distancing to slow the spread of COVID-19. As of April 1, eight prisoners in three California facilities and 27 prison employees had tested positive for the novel coronavirus.
The state has responded to such numbers by stopping the admissions of new prisoners and announcing the release of 3,500 nonviolent inmates who are within 60 days of the end of their sentences. Attorneys say those measures don't go far enough to ensure that inmates can stay six feet away from each other. But they did not propose a specific release number to the court.
"Given that plaintiffs have conceded that they don't know how many inmates we would need to release in order to attain six-foot physical distancing, how can this court do its job of evaluating the impact on public safety to the release of that number of inmates since we don't even know anything about the characteristics of that group?" asked U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar of the Northern District of California.
Norman said the plaintiffs can't offer a concrete number until the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation measures the space in currently used prison dorms to decide how many people can be housed six feet apart.
"And then they will know how many people need to be moved," Norman said. The state can do that within a matter of days, she said, and then decide whether inmates should be released or rehoused in unused gyms or buildings both inside and outside the system.
"We believe it is very much within this court's power to order them to do so," Norman said.
Tigar was joined on the panel by Judge Kim Wardlaw of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and U.S. District Chief Judge Kimberly Mueller of the Eastern District of California.
Representing the state, Hanson Bridgett partner Paul Mello called the inmates' motion "unclear" and "inchoate." Corrections officials have taken "bold" steps to reduce the risk to inmates and they "should be afforded the opportunity to do those things without intervention of this courts especially when plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that they have satisfied the elements of the" Prison Litigation Reform Act, Mello said.
Asked by the judges whether the changes would ensure adequate spacing among inmates, Mello said that it's too early to tell and, in any case, the Eighth Amendment does not require prisons to meet that standard.
Newsom said earlier this week that he has "no interest" in releasing "violent criminals" from prison.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDeception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
5 minute readNewsom Names Two Judges to Appellate Courts in San Francisco, Orange County
5 minute readAdvisory Opinion Offers 'Road Map' for Judges Defending Against Campaign Attacks
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250