perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page i
Mental Health Issues in
Jails and Prisons
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page ii
Carolina Academic Press
Law Casebook Series
Advisory Board
❦
Gary J. Simson, Chairman
Dean, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Raj Bhala
University of Kansas School of Law
John C. Coffee, Jr.
Columbia University Law School
Randall Coyne
University of Oklahoma College of Law
John S. Dzienkowski
University of Texas School of Law
Paul Finkelman
Albany Law School
Robert M. Jarvis
Shepard Broad Law Center
Nova Southeastern University
Vincent R. Johnson
St. Mary’s University School of Law
Michael A. Olivas
University of Houston Law Center
Kenneth Port
William Mitchell College of Law
Michael P. Scharf
Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Peter M. Shane
Michael E. Moritz College of Law
The Ohio State University
Emily L. Sherwin
Cornell Law School
John F. Sutton, Jr.
Emeritus, University of Texas School of Law
David B. Wexler
John E. Rogers College of Law
University of Arizona
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page iii
Mental Health Issues in
Jails and Prisons
Cases and Materials
Michael L. Perlin
Professor of Law
New York Law School
Henry A. Dlugacz
Adjunct Professor of Law
New York Law School
Assistant Clinical Professor of
Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
New York Medical College
Carolina Academic Press
Durham, North Carolina
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Copyright © 2008
Michael L. Perlin and Henry A. Dlugacz
All Rights Reserved
ISBN 10: 1-59460-408-8
ISBN 13: 978-1-59460-408-9
LCCN: 2007936555
Carolina Academic Press
700 Kent Street
Durham, North Carolina 27701
Telephone (919) 489-7486
Fax (919) 493-5668
www.cap-press.com
Printed in the United States of America
Page iv
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page v
As always, to Linda, Julie and Alex — my inspiration and my heart and soul.
M.L.P.
Trenton, New Jersey
May 11, 2007
This book is dedicated to the family, immediate and extended, I love so much, for
their endless support, guidance, (and tolerance). To Luisa, wife and partner, our children, Isaac, Noah and Alfredo, and to the memories of my father, Dr. Irving Dlugacz,
and my uncle, Professor Joseph Bensman, who taught me how to think critically from
an early age. I also want to thank the many colleagues, teachers and clients, from whom
I’ve learned so much about how to bring humanity to intellectual pursuits, especially,
Professor Andrew Hacker, Professor Michael Perlin, Dr. Lambert King, and the Honorable Jack B. Weinstein.
H.A.D.
New York, New York
May 9, 2007
And, in the words of the poet, for those . . .
Tolling for the rebel, tolling for the rake
Tolling for the luckless, the abandoned an’ forsaked
Tolling for the outcast, burnin’ constantly at stake
(Bob Dylan, 1964, Chimes of Freedom)
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page vi
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page vii
Contents
Table of Cases
Acknowledgments
About the Authors
xxiii
xxv
xxvii
Chapter 1 An Overview
A. Introduction
3
3
Chapter 2 Persons with Mental Illness and the Criminal Justice System:
Why Should We Care?
A. Overview
B. Scope of the Public Health Problem
1. Doris J. James & Lauren E. Glaze, Mental Health Problems of
Prison and Jail Inmates
C. Public Safety
1. Introduction
2. Violence and Mental Illness
a. MacArthur Research Network on Mental Health and the Law,
The MacArthur Community Violence Study
3. Victimization of Persons with Mental Illness in the Community
D. Fiscal Responsibility
1. Chad Kinsella, Healthcare Cost Strains Prisons
E. Historical Background
1. “Slave of the State” Doctrine
a. Ruffin v. Commonwealth
2. “Hands Off ” Doctrine
a. Banning v. Looney
3. Demise of the “Hands Off ” Doctrine
a. Introduction
b. Early Pre-Gamble Cases
(1) Introduction
(2) Newman v. Alabama
(3) Williams v. Vincent
F. Questions and Notes
Chapter 3 Diversion
A. Overview
1. Mark R. Munetz & Patricia A. Griffin, Use of the Sequential
Intercept Model As an Approach to Decriminalization of People with
Serious Mental Illness
vii
7
7
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
12
12
13
14
14
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
18
18
21
21
23
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
viii
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page viii
CONTENTS
B. Different Mechanisms
C. Developing a Diversion Approach
1. Introduction
2. Pre-Booking Approaches
a. Special Training for Police
(1) Crisis Intervention Team
(a) Major Sam Cochran, Fighting Stigma in Law
Enforcement: The Message Has to Come from the Heart
(b) Procedural Justice and Police Response
3. Other Models
a. National Alliance of the Mentally Ill, The Mentally Ill and the
Criminal Justice System: A Review of Programs
D. An Under-Explored Legal Issue: Emergency Rooms
1. Examination and Treatment for Emergency Medical
Conditions and Women in Labor: The Emergency Medical
Treatment and Active Labor Act
E. Post-Arrest Diversion Programs
1. The Nathaniel Project
2. At Arraignment: The NY EXIT Program
F. Trial Diversion Strategies: Mental Health Courts
1. Introduction
2. Aaron Levin, MH Courts Garner Mostly Favorable Reviews
3. The Role of Mental Health Courts in System Reform
a. Brooklyn Mental Health Court Treatment Plan
The Brooklyn Mental Health Court
b. Questions of Appropriateness
(1) The Broward County Court
(2) Other Mental Health Courts
4. Council of State Governments: A Guide to Mental Health
Court Design and Implementation
5. On Effectiveness
a. Rearrest and Linkage to Mental Health
G. What Works?
1. Joseph Morrissey & Piper Meyer, Extending Assertive
Community Treatment to Criminal Justice Settings,
The National GAINS Center for Systemic Change for
Justice-Involved People with Mental Illness
2. The Most Recent Research
H. The Role of the Judge and Court System
1. Judge Jack Weinstein, When Is a Social Worker As Well As a
Lawyer Needed?
I. Questions
Chapter 4 Entry into the Criminal Justice System
A. Detainees
1. Introduction
2. Statistical Profile
a. The National GAINS Center, The Prevalence of Co-Occurring
Mental Illness and Substance Use Disorders in Jails
30
31
31
32
33
33
35
35
36
36
36
36
39
39
41
42
42
42
44
44
44
46
47
47
47
50
50
50
50
53
53
53
56
57
57
57
57
58
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page ix
CONTENTS
b. Suicide
B. What Is Legally Required?
1. Detainee Status
a. Griffin B. Bell et al. v. Louis Wolfish et al.
C. Application: Screening/Suicide
1. Introduction
2. Michelle Gibson v. County of Washoe, Nevada
D. Duty to Screen
1. Phyllis Jean Belcher, Administratrix of the Estate of Arthur Belcher,
Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sidney Oliver, Individually and As Mayor of
Clendenin, West Virginia; et al.
2. Elise Elizabeth Gordon, Individually and As Administratrix of the
Estate of Clarence Gordon, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee v.
C.W. Kidd, et al. Defendants-Appellants
3. Questions
4. Joe Marsh, Leroy Owens, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. Butler County,
Alabama, the Butler County Commission, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees
E. Competency to Stand Trial
1. Background
a. Bruce Winick, Restructuring Competency to Stand Trial
b. Note: The Identification of Incompetent Defendants:
Separating Those Unfit for Adversary Combat from Those
Who Are Fit
c. Bruce Winick & Terry DeMeo, Competence to Stand
Trial in Florida
d. Questions
2. Substantive Rights
a. Milton R. Dusky v. United States of America
b. James Edward Drope v. Missouri
c. Questions
3. Procedural Standards
a. Frank J. Pate v. Theodore Robinson
b. Burden of Proof
(1) Teofilo Medina, Jr. v. California
(2) Byron Keith Cooper v. Oklahoma
c. Questions
4. Medication
5. Non-Psychiatric Disorders
a. Introduction
b. James Ellis & Ruth Luckasson, Mentally Retarded
Criminal Defendants
c. Questions
6. Disposition and Placement of Issues
a. Note: Before Jackson v. Indiana
(1) Historical Background
(2) Institutional Conditions
b. Theon Jackson v. State of Indiana
c. Questions
ix
59
61
61
61
80
80
81
96
96
99
108
109
122
122
122
125
127
129
129
129
130
135
136
136
143
143
153
161
162
162
162
162
171
172
172
172
172
172
183
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
x
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page x
CONTENTS
F.
d. Grant Morris & J. Reid Meloy, Out of Mind? Out of Sight:
The Uncivil Commitment of Permanently Incompetent
Criminal Defendants
e. Questions
Insanity
1. Introduction
a. Michael L. Perlin, Mental Disability Law: Civil and Criminal
2. Substantive Standards
a. Michael L. Perlin, Mental Disability Law: Civil and Criminal
b. On Clark v. Arizona
3. Guilty but Mentally Ill (GBMI)
a. People v. William Lee Seefeld
b. Arthur C. Whitt v. State of Indiana
c. People v. Shirley Marshall
d. Linda Fentiman, “Guilty But Mentally Ill”: The Real Verdict
Is Guilty
e. Ira Mickenberg, A Pleasant Surprise: The Guilty but
Mentally Ill Verdict Has Both Succeeded in Its Own Right and
Successfully Preserved the Traditional Role of the
Insanity Defense
4. After Hinckley
a. The Insanity Defense Reform Act
(1) Michael L. Perlin, Mental Disability Law: Civil and
Criminal
(2) Lisa Callahan, Connie Mayer & Henry Steadman,
Insanity Defense Reform in the United States Post-Hinckley
(3) Questions
5. Procedural Issues
a. Burden of Proof
(1) Michael L. Perlin, The Jurisprudence of the Insanity
Defense
b. Privilege against Self-Incrimination
(1) Michael L. Perlin, Law and Mental Disability
c. The Right to Refuse Medication
d. Experts and Counsel
(1) Glen Burton Ake v. Oklahoma
e. Questions
6. Defendants with Other Disabilities
a. Mental Retardation
(1) James Ellis & Ruth Luckasson, Mentally Retarded
Criminal Defendants
b. Physiological Disorders
(1) Michael L. Perlin, “Big Ideas, Images and Distorted Facts:”
The Insanity Defense, Genetics, and the “Political World,”
from Genetics and Criminality: The Potential Misuse of
Scientific Information in Court
c. Notes and Questions
7. Insanity Defense Myths
a. Empirical Myths
184
191
192
192
192
195
195
202
213
213
214
215
216
223
228
228
228
230
236
237
237
237
239
239
240
240
240
248
250
250
250
253
253
258
259
259
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xi
CONTENTS
8.
9.
(1) Michael L. Perlin, Mental Disability Law: Civil and
Criminal
b. Question
c. John Hinckley: The Saga Continues
Post-Acquittal Commitment
a. State of New Jersey v. Stefan Krol
b. Michael Jones v. United States
(1) On Jones
(a) Michael L. Perlin, Mental Disability Law: Civil and
Criminal
(2) Under the IDRA
Questions
Chapter 5 Sentenced Inmates
A. Introduction
B. Federal Sentencing Guidelines
1. Background
a. Jack B. Weinstein & Christopher Wimmer,
Sentencing in the United States
b. How Do the Guidelines Apply to Individuals with
Mental Illness?
2. Departures and Mental Illness: Standards and
Underlying Attitudes
a. Michael L. Perlin & Keri K. Gould, Rashomon and the
Criminal Law: Mental Disability and the Federal Sentencing
Guidelines
b. Success of Defendants with Mental Disabilities in
Seeking Departures
(1) United States of America, Appellant v.
Jose Maldonado-Montalvo, Defendant, Appellee
c. Note on the Feeney Amendment
3. Guidelines Are Advisory Not Mandatory: The Booker Case
a. United States, Petitioner v. Freddie J. Booker, United States,
Petitioner v. Ducan Fanfan
b. Post-Booker Applications
(1) United States of America, Appellee v. Paul M. Anderson,
Defendant, Appellant
(2) United States of America, Plaintiff v. Jacob Pallowick,
Defendant
(3) United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v.
Marion Hungerrord, Defendant-Appellant
C. Post Sentence: Inmate Discipline
1. Jamie Fellner, A Correctional Quandary: Mental Illness and
Prison Rules
D. Legal Standard for Disciplinary Actions: Sandin
1. Cinda Sandin, Unit Team Manager, Halawa Correctional Facility,
Petitioner v. Demont R.D. Conner et al.
E. Post-Conviction Transfer to a Psychiatric Hospital
1. Joseph Vitek, etc., et al. v. Larry D. Jones
xi
259
262
262
262
262
270
277
277
278
279
281
281
282
282
282
283
283
283
293
293
300
300
300
316
316
322
329
335
335
346
346
350
350
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
xii
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xii
CONTENTS
F.
Probation: Special Issues Involving Probationers with
Mental Disabilities
1. Risdon N. Slate, Richard Feldman, Erik Roskes &
Migdalia Baerga, Training Federal Probation Officers As Mental
Health Specialists in Federal Probation
G. Questions
Chapter 6 Special Populations
A. Juveniles
1. Introduction
2. Historical Background
a. Development of the Juvenile System and Unique
Characteristics of the Population
(1) Carrie Fried Mulford, N. Dickon Reppucci,
Edward P. Mulvey, Jennifer L. Woolard & Sharon L.
Portwood, Legal Issues Affecting Mentally Disordered and
Developmentally Delayed Youth in the
Justice System
b. Shift towards a More Rights-Oriented Approach
(1) In re Gault
c. Rights within Institutions: Constitutional Standard and
Applicability of Federal Statutes — Is There a
Right to Rehabilitation?
(1) Flora Santana, et al., Plaintiffs, Appellants v.
Jenaro Collazo Collazo, et al., Defendants, Appellees.
Flora Santana, et al., Plaintiffs, Appellees and United
States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor, Appellant v.
Jenaro Collazo, et al., Defendants, Appellees
(2) Alexander S., Alfred S., Benny B., Christopher M.,
Lafayette M., and Ricky S., by and through Their
Guardian ad Litem, Lesly A. Bowers, Individually and As
Representatives of a Class of Juveniles, Plaintiffs v.
Flora Brooks Boyd, Individually and in Her Official
Capacity As Director of the Department of Juvenile Justice;
Richard E. McLawhorn, Individually and in His Official
Capacity As Former Commissioner of the Department of
Juvenile Justice for the State of South Carolina; John F.
Henry, Frank Mauldin, Kathleen P. Jennings, Joseph W.
Hudgens, Karole Jensen and J.P. Neal, Individually and in
Their Official Capacities As Former Board Members
for the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice,
Defendants
d. Questions
B. Super-Max or Extended Control Units
1. Introduction
2. What Are Supermax Facilities? What Effect Does Isolation
Have on People?
a. Overview
(1) In re Medley
358
358
370
371
371
371
371
371
371
395
395
408
408
417
429
430
430
430
430
430
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xiii
CONTENTS
3.
(2) Jeffrey Metzner & Joel Dvoskin, An Overview of
Correctional Psychiatry
(3) Disability Advocates, Inc. v. New York State Office of
Mental Health
b. Is There a Protected Interest Due Process Proceedings
Prior to Placement in Isolation? What Procedures Does the
Constitution Require and What Is the Standard Employed?
(1) Reginald A. Wilkinson, Director, Ohio Department of
Rehabilitation and Correction, et al., Petitioners v.
Charles E. Austin et al.
(2) Note
c. Does Confinement in Supermax Aggravate, Cause or
Promote Mental Illness? What Does the Constitution
Require?
(1) Christopher J. Scarver, Plaintiff-Appellant v.
Jon Litscher, et al., Defendants-Appellees
(2) Dennis E. Jones’El, Micha’El Johnson, De’Ondre Conquest,
Luis Nieves, Scott Seal, Alex Figueroa, Robert Sallie,
Chad Goetsch, Edward Piscitello, QuintinL’Minggio,
Lorenzo Balli, Donald Brown, Christopher Scarver,
Benjamin Biese, Lashawn Logan, Jason Pagliarini and
Andrew Collette, and all Others Similarly Situated,
Plaintiffs v. Gerald Berge and Jon Litscher, Defendants
(3) Note
d. A Legislative Response?
(1) Note: NYSCOBA Testimony
e. An Executive Response?
Questions
Chapter 7 Conditions in Jails and Prisons: Deliberate Indifference to a
Serious Medical Need
A. Introduction
B. Historical Background
1. “Slave of the State”
a. Ruffin v. Commonwealth
2. “Hands Off Doctrine”
a. Banning v. Looney
3. Demise of the “Hands Off Doctrine”
a. Early Pre-Gamble Cases
(1) Newman v. Alabama
(2) Williams v. Vincent
(3) Questions
b. The Supreme Court Speaks: Estelle v. Gamble and the
“Deliberate Indifference” Standard
(1) W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections,
et al., Petitioners v. J. W. Gamble
(2) Note
(3) Questions
c. Applying the Constitutional Standard
xiii
433
441
442
442
451
451
451
455
475
475
475
475
475
477
477
478
478
478
478
478
478
478
478
478
479
479
479
484
484
484
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
xiv
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xiv
CONTENTS
4.
(1) Larry Grant Bowring, Appellant v. Mills E. Godwin,
Individually and As Governor, et al., Appellees
(2) The Supreme Court: Refining the Eighth Amendment
Standard
(a) Pearly L. Wilson, Petitioner v. Richard Seiter et al.
i) Questions
(b) Dee Farmer, Petitioner v. Edward Brennan,
Warden, et al.
i) Questions
ii) Note
d. Reckless Indifference
(1) The People of the State of New York, Appellant v.
Michael Angelo, Respondent
(2) Questions
e. Medical Needs and Supreme Court Standards
(1) Note
(2) Serious Medical Needs: In General
(a) Note
(b) Test Employed to Determine Seriousness of Need
i) Ellis Partee, Plaintiff v. Michael Lane, et al.,
Defendants
a) Question
ii) John C. McGuckin, Plaintiff-Appellant v.
Dr. Smith, et al.; John C. Medlen, Dr.,
Defendants-Appellees
iii) Questions
(3) Specific Issues in Applying the Serious Medical
Needs Prong
(a) Gender Identity Disorder
i) Michelle Kosilek, Plaintiff v. Michael T. Maloney,
Defendant
(b) Medication Side Effects and Unwanted Medication
i) Vurnis L. Gillis, Plaintiff v.
Judge Charles H. Toliver et al.
(c) Lithium Toxicity
i) Julie Rogers, Plaintiff v. Nolan County,
Nolan County Sheriff Donnie Rannifeld, and
Unknown Deputies, Defendants
(d) Depression Related to Violation of Religious Belief
i) Rian Deverick Lewis, Plaintiff v.
John Mitchell, et al., Defendants
ii) Questions
Application of the Deliberate Indifference Standard:
Cases of Complex Mental Health Delivery Systems
a. David Ruiz et al., Plaintiff, United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor v. W. J. Estelle, Jr., et al., Defendants
(1) Note
b. David Ruiz, et al., Plaintiffs, United States of America,
Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Gary Johnson, et al., Defendants,
484
486
486
488
488
500
501
502
502
503
503
503
503
503
504
504
506
506
508
508
508
508
519
519
521
521
525
525
526
527
527
534
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xv
CONTENTS
Honorable John Culberson and Honorable J.E. “Buster”
Brown, Defendant-Intervenors
(1) Questions
c. Ralph Coleman, et al., Plaintiffs v. Pete Wilson, et al.,
Defendants
(1) Questions
d. Note
(1) Questions
Chapter 8 Elements of a Constitutional System
A. Introduction
1. Clarence J. Sundram, Monitoring the Quality and Utilization of
Mental Health Services in Correctional Facilities
B. Elements of a Constitutional System of Care: General Systemic
Requirements
1. Alejandro Madrid, et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others
Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. James Gomez, Director,
California Department of Corrections, et al., Defendants
2. Jeffrey L. Metzner, Class Action Litigation in Correctional
Psychiatry
3. Note
4. Specific Applications: Screening and Suicide
a. Introduction
b. Pugh v. Wallace
c. Belcher v. Oliver et al.
d. Hendrix v. Faulkner
(1) Jail Suicide/Mental Health Update
(2) Henry J. Steadman, Jack E. Scott, Fred Osher,
Tara K. Agnese & Pamela Clark Robbins,
Validation of the Brief Jail Mental Health Screen
5. Specific Applications: Records
a. Hott v. Hennepin
6. Specific Applications: Restraint
a. Hadix v. Caruso
b. Metin Bosog lu Maria Livanou & Cvetana Crnobaric,
Torture vs Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment,
Is the Distinction Real or Apparent?
C. Professional Judgment Standard: Applicable to Assessment of
Adequacy?
1. Youngberg v. Romeo
2. Langley v. Coughlin
3. Application of Youngberg Standard: In General
a. Anderson v. Caden
4. Application of Youngberg: The Question of Suicide
a. The Estate of Max G. Cole, by Its Administratrix Lois
Pardue, and Lois Pardue, Plaintiffs-Appellants v.
Jackie Fromm, Phill Spires, Dan Beck, Katie Grier Easton,
Clement Morris, and Nancy Butler, Defendants-Appellees
b. Questions
xv
534
536
536
563
566
566
569
569
569
581
581
616
616
616
616
616
618
621
628
628
628
628
633
633
634
634
634
639
648
648
653
653
659
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
xvi
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xvi
CONTENTS
Chapter 9 The Right to Refuse Treatment
A. Pretrial
1. Incompetency to Stand Trial
a. The Charters Decisions
b. Charles Sell v. United States
B. In Prison
1. Washington v. Walter Harper
C. On Trial
1. David Riggins v. Nevada
D. Other Criminal Statuses
1. Michael L. Perlin, Decoding Right to Refuse Treatment Law
2. Questions
E. Non-Psychiatric Treatment
1. William Pabon, Plaintiff-Appellant, Felix Manuel Ruiz a/k/a
Pedro Ruiz, Plaintiff v. Dr. Lester Wright, et al.
2. Questions
661
661
661
661
662
670
670
686
686
696
696
697
698
Chapter 10 The Death Penalty
A. Competence to Be Executed
1. Alvin Bernard Ford v. Louie L. Wainwright
2. Johnny Paul Penry v. James A. Lynaugh
a. Subsequent Developments in Penry
b. Note
3. Daryl Atkins v. Virginia
4. Scott Louis Panetti, Petitioner v. Nathaniel Quarterman,
Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Correctional Institutions Division
5. Questions
B. The Constitutionality of Medicating a Defendant So As to Make
Him Competent to Be Executed
1. The Perry Litigation
a. Michael L. Perlin, Decoding Right to Refuse Treatment Law
b. State of Louisiana v. Michael Owen Perry
c. Michael Owen Perry, Petitioner v. Louisiana
d. State of Louisiana v. Michael Owen Perry
2. Developments after Perry
a. Fred Singleton, Respondent v. The State, Petitioner
b. Charles Laverne Singleton, Appellant v. Larry Norris,
Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, Appellee
3. The Most Recent Developments
a. Scott Louis Panetti, Petitioner-Appellant v. Doug Dretke,
Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent-Appellee
b. Subsequent Developments
4. Questions
709
709
709
720
735
735
736
Chapter 11 Statutory Issues
A. Introduction
B. The Americans with Disabilities Act
698
707
748
763
767
767
767
768
770
770
786
786
790
798
798
803
803
805
805
806
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xvii
CONTENTS
1.
An Overview
a. Michael L. Perlin, The ADA and Persons with Mental
Disabilities: Can Sanist Attitudes Be Undone?
2. Threshold Question: Does the ADA Apply to Prisons?
a. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, et al., Petitioners v.
Ronald R. Yeskey
3. Does Title II of ADA Permit Suits for Monetary Damages by a
Prisoner with a Disability?
a. United States, Petitioner v. Georgia et al.; Tony Goodman,
Petitioner v. Georgia et al.
4. The Interplay between Title II of the ADA and Other Federal
Statutes
a. Laurence W. Paradis, Rights of Prisoners with Disabilities
under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
b. Interplay with Other Statutes
5. Applicability of ADA to Parole Decisions
a. William G and Walter W. Complaint
b. Messiah S. Complaint
c. Dennis B. Anderson, Petitioner v. Teresa A. Schwartz, Respondent
6. Is the Community Integration Mandate Relevant to Corrections?
a. Olmstead, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Human
Resources, et al. v. L. C., by Zimring, Guardian ad Litem and
Next Friend, et al.
7. Is Lack of Funding a Sufficient Defense to an ADA Claim?
If So, What Is a Sufficient Showing?
a. Frederick L.; Nina S.; Kevin C.; Steven F., on Behalf of
Themselves and all Persons Similarly Situated, Appellants v.
Department of Public Welfare of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania; Estelle B. Richman, in Her Official Capacity As
Secretary of Public Welfare for the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania
C. Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA)
1. Overview
a. John Boston, The Prison Litigation Reform Act
2. The Statute
3. Should the PLRA Be Amended?
a. Prison Reform: Commission on Safety and Abuse in
America’s Prisons, Confronting Confinement
b. Application: Standards for Continuation or Termination of
Injunctive Relief
(1) Charles E. Austin et al., Plaintiffs v.
Reginald Wilkinson et al., Defendants
c. Application to Consent Decrees
(1) Benjamin v. Jacobson
d. Prior Showing of Physical Injury
(1) Thompson v. Carter
D. Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act
E. Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act of 2004
xvii
808
808
814
814
817
817
822
822
831
831
831
831
832
836
836
847
847
852
852
852
852
861
861
864
864
867
867
879
879
884
891
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
xviii
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xviii
CONTENTS
1.
2.
Note
Summary of the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime
Reduction Act of 2004
Chapter 12 Reentry Planning
A. Introduction
1. The Presenting Problem
2. Council of State Governments, Introduction:
The Report of the Re-Entry Policy Council
3. APIC Model
4. Newly Released Prisoners at High Risk of Death
B. The Constitutional Standard
1. Joshua DeShaney, a Minor, by His Guardian Ad Litem, and
Melody DeShaney, Petitioners v. Winnebago County
Department of Social Services, et al.
a. Note on DeShaney
2. Timothy E. Wakefield, Plaintiff-Appellant v. John Thompson,
Parole Agent; James Gomez, Director, California Department of
Corrections; Daniel Vasquez, ex-Warden, San Quentin Prison;
John Dupre, Staff Psychiatrist, San Quentin Prison; and John Doe,
Correctional Officer, San Quentin Prison, Defendants-Appellees
3. Application of Wakefield in Cases Involving Medical Care
a. George Lugo, Plaintiff v. Daniel Senkowski,
Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility; Dr. Lee,
Medical Director of Clinton Correctional Facilty;
Patrick Edwards, Parole Officer, Defendants
4. Application of Wakefield in Cases Involving Psychotropic
Medications
a. Brandon Griffith, Plaintiff v. Robert Hofmann, Vermont
Department of Corrections, Vermont Probation Department,
Jay Imons, Deb Thibault, Celeste Girrell, Scott Morley,
Defendants
5. Application of Wakefield to Cases of Parole and Housing
a. Alonzo Jacobs, Plaintiff-Appellant v. H. Ramirez, Parole Officer,
R. Mroczeck, Parole Counselor, Santiago, Senior Parole Officer,
E. Fisher, Assist. Senior Parole Officer, etc., al.,
Defendants-Appellees
6. Not All Courts Have Followed the Wakefield Reasoning
a. Joe Marsh, Leroy Owens, Plaintiffs-Appellants v.
Butler County, Alabama, the Butler County Commission, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees
C. Claims Based upon State Law
1. Brad H. et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others
Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. City of New York et al.,
Defendants
2. Brad H., Stipulation of Settlement
D. Questions
891
891
893
893
893
894
894
894
895
895
907
907
911
911
915
915
918
918
920
920
935
935
941
941
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xix
CONTENTS
xix
Chapter 13 Selected Private Law Issues
A. Documentation in the Clinical Record
1. Introduction
2. Basic Functions of the Record
3. Simpson and Stacy Article
B. Confidentiality
1. Introduction
2. Confidentiality v. Privilege
a. Philip Merideth, The Five C’s of Confidentiality and
How to DEAL with Them
3. HIPPA and Preemption and Interplay with Other
Relevant Standards
C. The Duty to Warn
1. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California
2. Subsequent Developments
a. Ewing v. Goldstein
D. Confidentiality in Medical Context in Federal Cases
1. John Doe, Appellant v. Joan Delie, Health Care Administrator;
Paul Noel, Medical Director; Diane Manson, Medical
Nurse/Grievance Officer; Sophie Swika, Medical Nurse;
Kim Zimmerman, Medical Nurse, and All Other Parties et al.,
Relevant to This Instant Civil Action against Them; James Price,
Superintendent (SCI Pittsburgh)
2. Doe v. Wigginton
E. Questions
943
943
943
943
944
944
944
944
Chapter 14 International Law Issues
A. Introduction
1. Human Rights before World War II
2. David Weissbrodt, An Introduction to the Sources of
International Law
3. Questions
B. Human Rights in the Modern Era
1. Introduction
a. Micheline R. Ishay, History of Human Rights
b. Questions
2. Conceptual Dichotomies
a. Universalism v. Cultural Relativism
(1) Mahmood Monshipouri, Promoting Universal Human
Rights: Dilemmas of Integrating Developing Countries
(2) Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process: International
Law and How We Use It
(3) Questions
b. Hard v. Soft Law
(1) Jose Alvarez, The New Dispute Settlers: (Half) Truths and
Consequences
(2) Questions
c. Peremptory Norms and Derogable v. Non-Derogable
Rights
977
977
977
944
946
946
946
955
955
964
964
973
975
977
978
979
979
979
980
981
981
981
983
983
983
983
985
985
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
xx
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xx
CONTENTS
(1) Sara Stapleton, Ensuring a Fair Trial in the International
Criminal Court: Statutory Interpretation and the
Impermissibility of Derogation
d. Negative v. Positive Rights
(1) Henry J. Steiner & Philip Alston, International Human
Rights in Context: Law, Politics, and Morality
(2) Questions
e. Civil and Political Rights v. Economic, Social, and
Cultural Rights
(1) Javaid Rehman, International Human Rights Law:
A Practical Approach
(2) Questions
f. The U.N. and Its Mechanisms for Protecting Human Rights
(1) The Work of U.N. Bodies
(a) Questions
(2) Looking at International Law
(a) The European Convention on Human Rights
(b) Case Law
i) Keenan v. The United Kingdom
ii) Anthony James Drew against the United Kingdom
the European Court of Human Rights
iii) Iorgov v. Bulgaria
iv) Questions
3. International Law in Jail and Prison Cases
a. Lareau v. Manson
b. Lareau v. Manson (on appeal)
c. Thompson v. Oklahoma
d. Questions
C. On Applicability of Standards
1. Atkins v. Virginia
a. Questions
2. Jamie Fellner, A Corrections Quandary: Mental Illness and
Prison Rules
a. Questions
3. Alvin J. Bronstein & Jenni Gainsborough, Using International
Human Rights Laws and Standards for U.S. Prison Reform
D. The Relationship between Forensic Mental Health Practice,
Professional Standards, International Human Rights Standards, and
Conditions in Jails and Prisons
1. Introduction
Chapter 15 Legal Counseling of Persons with Mental Disabilities in
Jails and Prisons: On Sanism and Pretextuality
A. Some Other Jurisprudential Considerations: Heuristics and
“Ordinary Common Sense” (OCS)
1. Heuristics
2. Ordinary Common Sense (OCS)
B. On Sanism
1. Introduction
985
986
986
987
987
987
988
988
988
989
989
989
989
990
1008
1013
1024
1025
1025
1036
1036
1041
1042
1042
1042
1042
1042
1043
1049
1049
1053
1053
1053
1059
1060
1060
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xxi
CONTENTS
2.
Sanist Myths
a. Michael L. Perlin, “Where the Winds Hit Heavy on the
Borderline:” Mental Disability Law, Theory and Practice,
“Us” and “Them”
b. Sanist Judges
(1) Michael L. Perlin, “Half-Wracked Prejudice Leaped Forth:”
Sanism, Pretextuality, and Why and How Mental
Disability Law Developed As It Did
3. Sanism and Legal Representation
a. Michael L.Perlin, “You Have Discussed Lepers and Crooks:”
Sanism in Clinical Teaching
C. On Pretextuality
1. Introduction
2. Pretextuality and Morality
a. Michael L. Perlin, Pretexts and Mental Disability Law:
The Case of Competency
3. Questions
Index
xxi
1063
1063
1066
1066
1068
1068
1077
1077
1080
1080
1086
1089
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xxii
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xxiii
Table of Cases
Ake v. Oklahoma, 151–152, 201, 240, 290,
714, 718, 764
Alexander v. Boyd, 386, 417
Anderson v. Caden, 648
Anderson v. Schwartz, 832
Atkins v. Virginia, 171, 736, 759, 763–764,
766–767, 796, 1042, 1044
Austin v. Wilkinson, 864
Banning v. Looney, 15, 478
Belcher v. Oliver, 96, 105, 107, 618
Bell v. Wolfish, 61, 87, 96–97, 349, 413–414,
416, 424–425, 454, 495–496, 581, 604,
618, 627, 630, 638, 688, 776, 899,
1028–1030, 1032, 1034
Benjamin v. Jacobson, 867–868
Bowring v. Godwin, 217, 484, 505, 533, 603
Brad H. v. City of NY, 935
Coleman v. Wilson, 338, 536, 571, 574, 616
Cooper v. Oklahoma, 153
DeShaney v. Winnebago, 21, 85, 113, 120,
500, 642, 793, 893, 895, 909, 912, 919,
925, 933
Disability Advocates, Inc. v. NY OMH, 441
Doe v. Delie, 964
Doe v. Wigginton, 970, 973
Drew v. UK, 1008
Drope v. Missouri, 124, 127, 130, 143,
145–146, 148–149, 155, 167, 380, 391,
690
Dusky v. United States, 123, 129, 135, 141,
146, 150, 155, 160, 726
Estate of Cole by Pardue v. Fromm, 467, 653
Estelle v. Gamble, 12, 14, 96–97, 104, 107,
120, 217, 416, 477, 479, 486, 491, 496,
505, 509, 519, 525, 533, 536, 538, 563,
618, 621, 625, 638, 642–643, 699, 793,
899–900, 902, 909, 912, 917,
1031–1033, 1046
Ewing v. Goldstein, 955
Farmer v. Brennan, 87, 112, 117, 453, 470,
484, 486, 488, 569, 631, 655, 866, 912,
917, 923–924
Ford v. Wainwright, 709, 713, 725–727, 740,
748, 759–760, 769, 772, 787, 790, 793,
799
Frederick v. Dept of Public Welfare of PA,
847
In re Gault, 372, 392, 395, 418
Gibson v. County of Washoe, Nevada, 81
Gillis v. Toliver, 519
Goodman v. Georgia, 817
Gordon v. Kidd, 99
Griffith v. Hofmann, 915
Hadix v. Caruso, 633
Hendrix v. Faulkner, 621
Hott v. Hennepin, 628
Iorgov v. Bulgaria, 1013
Jackson v. Indiana, 5, 124, 133, 152, 159,
171–172, 183–184, 264–265, 273, 275,
354, 387, 392, 409, 413, 421, 423, 696,
1042, 1073
Jacobs v. Ramirez, 918
Jones v. United States, 210, 217, 261, 270,
272, 275, 277–279, 302, 412, 747
Jones’El v. Berge, 452, 455
Keenan v. UK, 990
Kosilek v. Maloney, 508
Langley v. Coughlin, 571–572, 639, 937
Lareau v. Manson, 605, 1025, 1046
Lareau v. Manson, 1036
Lewis v. Mitchell, 525
Lugo v. Senkowski, 911, 916, 919
Madrid v. Gomez, 341, 454, 467, 475, 541,
543, 571–572, 574, 581
Marsh v. Butler County, 109–110, 920–921
McGuckin v. Smith, 506, 526, 538
Medina v. California, 143, 155, 157–158,
383, 392
xxiii
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
xxiv
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xxiv
TABLE OF CASES
In re Medley, 430, 598
Newman v. Alabama, 4, 16, 412, 478, 485,
532, 605, 622–623
Olmstead v. Zimring, 836
Pabon v. Wright, 698
Panetti v. Quarterman, 748
Panetti v. Dretke, 798
Partee v. Lane, 504
Pate v. Robinson, 124, 128, 132–136, 143,
146–149, 155, 167, 690, 715
Pennsylvania Dep’t of Corrections v. Yeskey,
814
Penry v. Lynaugh, 284, 289, 720, 736, 742,
767
People v. Angelo, 502
People v. Marshall, 215
People v. Seefeld, 213
Perry v. Louisiana, 767–768, 770–771, 773
Pugh v. Wallace, 616
Riggins v. Nevada, 148–149, 153, 155, 158,
240, 520, 665, 686, 775, 788, 791, 797,
1068
Ruffin v Commonwealth, 14, 478
Rogers v. Nolan County, 521
Ruiz v. Estelle, 416, 425, 527, 535–536, 538,
570, 943
Ruiz v. Johnson, 342, 467, 534, 616,
862–863
Sandin v. Conner, 346, 445–446, 522, 834
Santana v. Collazo, 387, 393, 408, 420, 422,
643
Scarver v. Litscher, 451
Sell v. US, 162, 662–665
Singleton v. Norris, 790
Singleton v. State, 250, 786, 796
State v. Krol, 239, 262
State v. Perry, 767–768, 770–771, 793, 796
Thompson v. Carter, 879, 918
Thompson v. OK, 1036
Tarasoff v. Regents of University of CA, 946
US v. Anderson, 316
US v. Booker, 300
US v. Georgia, 817
US v. Hungerford, 329
US v. Maldonado-Montalvo, 293
US v. Pallowick, 322
Vitek v. Jones, 350, 446, 534, 636, 671,
775–776, 789, 821, 840, 900, 1074
Wakefield v. Thompson, 121, 386, 394, 893,
907, 913, 916, 919, 933–934
Washington v. Harper, 4, 495, 520, 551–552,
577, 589, 650, 665, 670, 688, 691,
694–695, 701, 770–772, 774–775, 778,
788, 790, 797, 1074, 1083
Whitt v. Indiana, 214
Wilkinson v. Austin, 442
Williams v. Vincent, 18, 478, 483, 517
Wilson v. Seiter, 88, 486, 490, 492, 496–498,
500, 513, 538–539, 866, 967
Youngberg v. Romeo, 88, 215, 387, 395, 412,
416, 423, 634, 642–643, 652, 658, 661,
673, 679, 684, 846, 897–900, 902
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xxv
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Lisa Ruff, our research assistant, for her truly phenomenal
(there is no other word) assistance in every phase of this book. It is an overused cliche,
but, truly, we could not have done this without her. We also wish to thank Katrice
Ayarza for her flawless administrative support. Finally, we wish to thank Deans Richard
Matasar and Stephen Ellmann for their encouragement and on-going support.
xxv
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xxvi
perlin dlugacz 00 fmt auto5.qxd
12/5/07
2:03 PM
Page xxvii
About the Authors
Michael L. Perlin is Professor of Law at New York Law School (NYLS), director of
NYLS’s Online Mental Disability Law Program, and director of NYLS’s International
Mental Disability Law Reform Project in its Justice Action Center. He is also an Adjunct
Professor at NYU Medical Center and the University of Rochester Medical Center. Formerly the Director of the Division of Mental Health Advocacy in the NJ Department of
the Public Advocate, and Deputy Public Defender in charge of the Mercer County
(Trenton) NJ Office of the Public Defender, he now serves on the Board of Advisors of
Mental Disability Rights International, and on the Board of Directors of the International Academy of Law and Mental Health. He has also recently served as a member of
the Board of Advisors of the Correctional Association of New York’s Mental Health Services project.
Henry A. Dlugacz is an adjunct professor at New York Law School, at St. John’s University School of Law, and an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry and behavioral
Sciences at New York Medical College. He is an attorney, psychiatric social worker and
consultant in private practice in New York City, specializing in mental disability issues.
His work includes the monitoring of complex, federal class action litigations related to
forensic psychiatric hospitals and correctional mental health. Before entering private
practice exclusively, Prof. Dlugacz served as Director of Mental Health for the St. Vincent’s Hospital Correctional Health Program, Assistant Program Director for the St.
Vincent’s Hospital Correctional Health Program, an expert consultant and mediator for
the Special Master appointed by the Chief Judge of the District of New Mexico in a
multi-party class action litigation. As an attorney and psychiatric social worker, he has
performed similar court-appointed duties in cases in numerous jurisdictions around
the country and lectured on this topic in national and international forums.
xxvii