Correctional Case Law: 2010

• DOI: 10.1177/0734016811405602
• Author: James E. Robertson
• Published date: 01 June 2011
• Date: 01 June 2011
• Subject Matter: Articles

Recent Legal Developments

Correctional Case Law: 2010

James E. Robertson

1

Kaheny observed in 2010 that ‘‘[w]ithoutdoubt, a crucial development in judicial scholarship has

been an increasing interest in analyzing the lower federal appellate courts’’ (p. 29). There is good

reason for this interest. In matters of correctional law, the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals perform two

important functions: the error correction function remedies departure from procedural and substan-

tive rules; and the law-making function draws the parameters of statutory and constitutional rights

(Cooper & Berman, 2000).

The newfound interest in the U.S. Courts of Appeals stems in part from the U.S. Supreme Court’s

selective use of certiorari: it issued opinions in 92 cases during the 2009–2010 term, only one of

which directly spoke to prisoners’ rights, Wilkins v. Gaddy (2010). By contrast, the Court heard

some 150 cases annually during the 1980s (Schauer, 2009)—a decade that included landmark pris-

oners’ rights cases such as Rhodes v. Chapman (1981), Whitley v. Albers (1986), and Turner v. Safley

(1987). Consequently, in 2010 the U.S. C ourts of Appeals f unctioned as the de facto courts of

last resort in prison litigation. An understanding of correctional law requires scrutiny of their

decisions.

In-keeping with previous installments, this annual survey examines select prisoners’ rights cases

decided by the U.S. Courts of Appeals during 2010 and recommended for full-text publication in the

Federal Reporter, third series. The author chose these cases because they addressed persistent,

important, or emerging constitutional issues about confinement in jails and prisons. Because a sum-

mary judgment or dismissal in these cases typically led to their appeal, the cases discussed herein

reflect the practice of the U.S. Courts of Appeals to review cases de novo and, in so doing, to view

all facts and draw all inferences in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs. As in past, this

installment examines only constitutional issues raised before the U.S. Courts of Appeals.

Medical Care

Alcoholism

The National Commission on Correctional Health Care (2002) found that the ‘‘vast majority’’ of

the jail population abuse alcohol or other substances (p. 590). Consequently, many county jails

function as de facto detoxification facilities (Freudenberg, 2001), where afflicted inmates do not

receive even basic care (Wilper et al., 2009). The failure of jailers to recognize and respond to

alcohol withdrawal syndrome can result in death and liability. This scenario occurred in Harper

1

Department of Sociology and Corrections, Minnesota State University, Mankato, MN, USA

Corresponding Author:

James E. Robertson, Department of Sociology and Corrections, Minnesota State University, Mankato, MN 56001, USA

Email: james.robertson@mnsu.edu

Criminal Justice Review

36(2) 232-244

ª2011 Georgia State University

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0734016811405602

http://cjr.sagepub.com