MCLS
NOTES
January 2009Published by MCLS d/b/a Prisoners
Legal Services, 8 Winter Street, 11th Floor, Phones: (617) 482-2773; WATS (800)
882-1413
County prisoner collect: (617) 482-4124 |
|
Strategies For Re-Entry: page 2 |
Boston
On Tuesday November 18, the End The
Odds Coalition sponsored
a public forum addressing prisoner re-entry and reintegration at
Some of the voices heard were from
behind the walls, in the
form of letters from current prisoners read from the podium by
Coalition
members. A letter from Joseph Wood at
Other speakers included Lyndia
Downie, who runs the Pine
Street Inn, Leslie Walker, the director of MCLS, and Robert Dellelo,
who did more
than forty years in the
MCLS’ speed
dial
phone number for state prisoners is automatically authorized on all DOC
pin
cards. The speed dial number is *9004#. The office accepts calls about
new
matters on Monday afternoons from 1 to 4 (Tuesday, if Monday is a
holiday).
County prisoners should call (617) 482-4124, collect, during that same
time.
Commissioner Clarke said that in the
state of
Strategies
for a
Successful Re-Entry Plan
By Robert Dellelo
This
was Bobby Dellelo’s presentation to the End The Odds Coalition Forum in
There will never be a complete
and successful re-entry
plan without deep changes in the policies and practices implemented by
the
Department of Corrections inside the prisons. There will never be a
complete
and successful plan until all parties with vested interests in a
complete and
successful plan (stakeholders) are at the table and actively
participating in
the creation and implementation of that plan.
Further, in order to make
change, the commissioner
of corrections must understand the history of the present policies and
practices, which he inherited. In the spirit of helping the
commissioner
acquire this knowledge I refer him to the now-infamous "Remarks by
Governor William F. Weld, [to] The Attorney General's
on Corrections,” delivered on
April 27, 1992, at
These individuals (your
nemeses), commissioner, are
your inheritance. Unless you have the wherewithal to replace them with
qualified individuals that are trained in, and believe in,
rehabilitation and
reentry, corrections in Massachusetts will not really be about
corrections, but
about job security for the few, to the detriment of the prisoners and
society
at large.
The parties with a vested
interest (stakeholders) in
a complete and successful reentry plan are the Massachusetts Department
of
Corrections (including staff and correctional officers), the
Massachusetts Parole Board,
presently incarcerated offenders,
ex-offenders, and the community, both organizations and individuals.
Duties and Responsibilities of Stakeholders
1. Upon entering the system
every individual should
be classified based upon psychological testing done by qualified
psychologists.
Including, but not limited to, personality tests, I.Q. test, aptitude
tests,
and educational level tests. Each such individual should be given a
complete
physical and mental evaluation identifying any physical and or mental
needs of
each individual, including substance abuse issues.
2. There should be a
Psychological Department that
evaluates this information and formulates a plan, designed specifically
for
every individual, that's conducive to a logical transition through the
correctional system and prepares and assists each individual to assume
the
responsibilities and exercise the rights of a law abiding citizen of
the
commonwealth.
3. The Psychological Department
should be
responsible for the formulation and implementation of a system of
classification for the specific purpose of developing a rehabilitation
program
for each prisoner.
4. The Psychological Department
should identify
lifers and long-termers who would qualify for and benefit from
receiving post
high school academic or vocational training. After receiving degrees or
certifications these qualified individuals would then teach other
prisoners.
All final testing should be done through and by the Department of
Education.
5. All such prisoner-teachers
should be paid minimum
wages. Other qualified prisoners working in the maintenance of the
correctional
facilities should be paid minimum wages. Not only would this allow an
individual to pay taxes to help defray the cost of their confinement,
but it
would allow individuals to accumulate sufficient funds to assist their
successful reentry into the community.
6. All
7. The Department of
Corrections should hire
qualified ex-offenders that have been law abiding citizens for a period
of
three years, to assist the Psychological Department in creating
programs and
identifying program needs for successful transition back to the
community. And,
were appropriate, the Department of Corrections should hire
ex-offenders to
assist the department in developing training and re-entry policies.
8. The Psychological Department
should incorporate
community organizations and individuals to assist in the development
of, and
participate in, programs designed for successful transition back to the
community.
9. The experience of
ex-offenders who have
successfully transitioned back into the community, and the experience
of
community organizations and individuals who have successfully assisted
individuals transitioning back into the community are essential
components of
any reentry plan. No reentry plan will or could be successful without
the
direct assistance and participation of these individuals and
organizations.
10. The staff and correctional officers should be brought into the reentry process, in that, they have a vested interest in the smooth, orderly, and safe running of the prisons. The properly implemented reentry program, incorporating all individuals and organization with a vested interest will radically reduce violence and chaos throughout the correctional system.
Massachusetts Parole Board
Reentry does not begin when the
individual reenters
the community, but, in fact, began when the individual entered the
correctional
system. Exactly what does this means relative to the Parole Board?
Whatever
else it should mean, as a bare minimum, it should include the following:
1. The Parole Board should have
a greater duty and
responsibility than simply determining, if and when, an individual
should be
paroled, or violated for violating parole. The Parole Board should be
responsible for the reentry of all individuals directly back into the
community, regardless of whether the individual is paroled or is
wrapping up
the sentence.
2. The Parole Board should
become a Department of Reentry,
with fully staffed offices in every
3. It should be the duty and
responsibility of the
Department of Reentry to start the process of reentry of every
individual that
has served five or more years at least one year from that individual's
projected release date.
4. It should be the duty and
responsibility of the
Department of Reentry to start the process of reentry of every
individual that has
served less than five years at least six months from that individual's
projected
release date.
5. It is the statutorily
mandated duty and
responsibility of the Department of Correction to provide every
individual
sentenced to its custody and care with the necessary programs and tools
required to rehabilitate the individual. It should be the duty and
responsibility of the Department of Reentry to make sure that that
statutorily
mandated duty and responsibility of the Department of Correction has
been met.
6. The Department of Reentry
should be responsible
for, though not limited to, assisting individuals in finding housing,
jobs, and
obtaining the necessary identification papers to obtain driver
licenses, Mass.
Health, and Social Security, and be responsible for helping the
individual
obtain necessary documents.
7. The Department of Reentry
should hire qualified
ex-offenders that have been law abiding citizens for a period of three
years,
to assist the Department of Reentry in creating programs and
identifying
program needs for successful transition back to the community.
8. The Department of Reentry
should incorporate the
assistance of ex-offenders and community organizations and individuals
to
assist the individuals, not less than 90 days from the individual's
projected
release date, by bringing them out on escorted furloughs for job
interviews,
obtaining housing, and acquiring the necessary identification paper and
documents needed for successful transition back into the community.
9. It should be the duty and
responsibility of the
Department of Reentry to negotiate with Housing Authorities and
Landlords in
the development of housing for individuals reentering the community.
10. It should be the duty and
responsibility of the
Department of Reentry to negotiate with the Business Community and
Chamber of
Commerce in developing jobs, and obtaining the federal bonding for
individuals
reentering the community.
11. It is the statutorily
mandated responsibility of
the Department of Corrections to train individuals sentenced to its
care and
custody, however, it should be the duty and responsibility of the
Department of
Reentry to obtain jobs for the individuals trained by the Department of
Corrections. It should also be the duty and responsibility of the
Department of
Reentry to "blow the whistle" on the Department of Correction if it
is not doing its statutorily mandated duty. The Department of Reentry
simply
could not do its job if the Department of Corrections does not do its
job.
CONCLUSION
Obviously, the devil is in the
details, but there
simply will be no meaningful, complete, and successful reentry plan
without all
stakeholders in a meaningful, complete, and successful plan being at
the table
Required Reading
By Peter
Berkowitz
The July/August 2001 volume of the Monthly Review, entitled Prisons & Executions - The U.S. Model, is an excellent analysis of the history and politics behind the U.S. Prison system. The issue contains eleven articles by prisoners, lawyers and academics that touch on every facet of the prison system, including the increasing incarceration of disabled persons, the use of imprisonment to stifle dissent, women prisoners and political prisoners. I found the first article, “Prisons and Executions-the U.S. Model: A Historical Introduction,” particularly interesting.
The history of American prisons can
be viewed as the product
of two great experiments. The first was the creation of the
penitentiary at the
end of the eighteenth century, an invention which quickly spread
throughout the
industrializing countries. The second experiment began in the 1970’s
and has
been confined mainly to the
Up until the 1780’s punishment by
incarceration was unknown
in Europe or its colonies in
The first prisons established as the
main means of
punishment for crime were in
The contradictions resulting from the penitentiary system became apparent within a short time. By the 1830’s it was recognized that prisons didn’t reduce crime but rather encouraged recidivism, and also that imprisonment was reserved largely for the poor and for people of color.
The incarceration rate in the
Today, after almost 40 years of the
second great experiment,
the
Why has our government decided to
remove poor people and
people of color from society and into prison? I recommend the Monthly
Review
issue entitled Prisons &
Executions-the
Peter Berkowitz is an MCLS staff attorney.
CORI Regulatory
Reform
At
the beginning of this year, Governor Patrick issued Executive Order
495, easing
somewhat the restrictions on hiring people with CORI by state agencies
and
organizations that contract with state agencies to provide human
services. The purpose
of this Executive Order was to revamp regressive policies that locked
out
people with CORIs from working in health care and human service
positions. This
month, the Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS) has
released
proposed new regulations that implement these changes for public
comment.
Through ongoing conversations with EOHHS, the Boston Workers’
There
was a public hearing on the proposed regulations on December 22, 2008,
at which
almost all participants testified in favor of loosening the present
restrictions on hiring individuals with CORI by the state and by
organizations
that contract to provide services to the state. The new regulations are
too
long to include in MCLS Notes, but they are posted on the MCLS website
at http://www.mcls.net.
MCLS will report on the
revised regulations in their final form in the next issue of MCLS
Notes.
Overcrowding Snapshot
DOC Population 9/29/2008: 11,510
Total: 25,571
County total includes DOC prisoners in county houses of correction.
Massachusetts
On
August 10, 2008, Governor Patrick committed Massachusetts
EXECUTIVE
OFFICE FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY
Jails and Correctional Facilities
8900-8500. For costs associated with planning and studies, dispositions, acquisition of land and buildings and interests therein by purchase, lease for a term, including any extensions, not to exceed 50 years, gift or other transfer, or by eminent domain under chapter 79 of the General Laws and for the preparation of plans and specifications, repairs, construction, renovations, improvements, asset management and demolition for state and county jails and correctional facilities; provided, that all projects approved for funding under this item by the division of capital asset management and maintenance shall be consistent in priority and need with a corrections’ master plan to be developed by the division of capital asset management and maintenance in consultation with the department of correction and the Massachusetts Sheriffs Association, and approved by the secretary of public safety and security and the secretary of administration and finance including, but not limited to, the following projects as provided for therein: a pre-release center and regional lock-up facility in Barnstable county, capital improvements to facilities in Berkshire and Bristol counties, the relocation of the “E911” communications center and improvements to the facilities in the county of Dukes County, additional capacity in Essex county, additional capacity at the Western Massachusetts Regional Women’s Correctional Center in Hampden county, the replacement of modular facilities in Hampshire county, the construction of additional capacity in Middlesex county, the construction of additional capacity, a storage warehouse, and parking facility improvements in Norfolk county, capital improvements to facilities in Plymouth county, capital improvements to facilities in Suffolk county and the construction of additional capacity in Worcester county; provided further, that projects that are not included in the master plan may be approved for funding by the division of capital asset management and maintenance if the commissioner of capital asset management and maintenance determines that circumstances following the development of the master plan resulted in a compelling need for funding the projects; provided further, that costs payable from this item include, but are not limited to, the costs of engineering and other services essential to these projects rendered by division of capital asset management and maintenance employees or by consultants; and provided further, that amounts expended for division employees may include the salary and salary-related expenses of these employees to the extent that they work on or in support of these projects; provided further, that not less than $100,000,000 shall be expended for costs associated with planning and studies, preparation of plans and specifications, repairs, construction, renovations, improvements, asset management and demolition and other capital improvements at the Middlesex Sheriff's office facilities to address severe and persistent overcrowding and staff training needs and for the costs associated with planning and studies, preparation of plans and specifications, acquisition of land and buildings therein by purchase for construction of a jail facility with adequate capacity in the southern portion of Middlesex county to replace the Middlesex jail in the city of Cambridge....................... $550,000,000
Dealing With D-Tickets
Many jailhouse lawyers are familiar with the Prisoners Self-Help Litigation Manual, a comprehensive guide to prison law which now unfortunately is out of print. However, one of its co-authors, Daniel Manville, has a new publication: The Disciplinary Self Help Litigation Manual. This is a multi-state guide. Although there is no substitute for being familiar with the Massachusetts DOC disciplinary regulations, this manual provides a state by state discussion of disciplinary procedures in each state as well as the procedural requirements for bringing a challenge to a disciplinary conviction in the courts of that state. The volume comes with a supplement (no extra charge) discussing the effect of the Supreme Court’s 2004 decision in Muhammad v. Close, which further refines the complex law regarding the distinction between matters that must be litigated via habeas corpus and those subject to litigation pursuant to 42 USC 1983.
The Disciplinary Self - Help Litigation Manual is available from
Daniel E. Manville, P.C.
P.O.
Box 20321
Ferndale,
MI
48220
The price is $34.95 for prisoners (which includes postage) and $64.95 to non-prisoners.
Prisoners Legal Services / MCLS also
provides, at no charge,
information packets in both English and Spanish discussing how to
handle
disciplinary hearings in
Prisoners Legal Services / MCLS does
not, however, provide
direct representation at disciplinary hearings.
For direct assistance with d-hearings, contact PLAP,
Austin Hall,
Litigation
Update on Rommel
Jones’ Case -Damages for Being Held Long Beyond Release Date
The last issue of MCLS Notes reported that the DOC had not settled Jones v. Common-wealth despite having admitted that it held Mr. Jones for more than four years after his sentence had expired. The case settled in July for $100,000, after having been stuck for a while because the DOC insisted that the plaintiff not reveal the settlement amount. Ultimately, DOC dropped that requirement. The settlement amount is the statutory maximum for a negligence action against the Commonwealth. In addition, the DOC sent Mr. Jones a formal letter of apology, and has overhauled its date computation system, after discovering that at least thirteen other prisoners had been imprisoned beyond their legal discharge dates. The calculation error made in Mr. Jones’ case was an old one. Date computation staff failed to run consecutive sentences concurrently during periods when Mr. Jones was out on parole. Mr. Jones intends to use his settlement to help provide for his daughter. The case was handled by MCLS Litigation Director James Pingeon.
Cruz
v. Clarke
– Challenge to DOC Failure to Apply Crooker
Because of Unlawful Dis-Aggregation
In October, MCLS’ Litigation Director, Jim Pingeon filed an amicus brief in the superior court in another sentence calculation case. The plaintiff is George Cruz, who is being denied credit for time on parole on the first of his two consecutive sentences because the DOC is taking the position that good time associated with that sentence caused it to expire prior to the date he was paroled. The MCLS amicus brief argues that application of good time to consecutive sentences in this way to trigger disaggregation violates well-settled case law, statutes, and that it is inconsistent with both the interpretation of the Parole Board in identical cases, and the practice of the DOC where the sentences are to different institutions. The matter is awaiting decision.
SJC Affirms Sheriff’s Power
to Use GPS Bracelet Program to Combat Overcrowding
This past August the
Nelson Rodriguez Estate Sues U. Mass. Correctional
Health, Mental Health
Staff and DOC Officials
At the beginning of December, MCLS staff attorney Peter Berkowitz filed an action for wrongful death, conscious pain and suffering, and civil rights violations against mental health staff and prison administrators on behalf of the estate of Nelson Rodriguez, a mentally retarded and mentally ill prisoner who hanged himself in Ten-Block at Walpole on the afternoon of December 20, 2005. Mr. Rodriguez had a long and well-documented history of mental illness and specific threats to harm himself, as well as written recommendations that he not be placed in segregation, prior to his suicide. The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages.
MCLS is involved with litigation
brought by the
High
In-State Collect Call Rates?
MCLS is considering action to address
the high cost of
collect telephone calls from county jails and houses of correction. We
are
interested in hearing from family members and friends of prisoners who live in
MCLS understands that collect charges for calls to other states are an even bigger problem for prisoners who must make them. Such interstate calls are being addressed by an administrative proceeding filed in 2003 by the D.C. Prisoners’ Project and others which is pending before the Federal Communications Commission, the national agency charged with overseeing and regulating interstate telephone calls. A ruling is unlikely to come before the Obama administration appoints new commissioners in 2009. MCLS is monitoring that proceeding and will put news of any important developments there in this newsletter.
Advocacy Staff at
MCLS
MCLS staff changes from time to time. This is the current line-up.
Attorneys: Leslie Walker,
(Executive
Director), Jim Pingeon, (Litigation Director), Peter Berkowitz, Brad Brockmann, Peter Costanza, Lauren Petit,
Bonnie Tenneriello, and Joel Thompson.
Paralegals: Al Troisi (Supervising Paralegal), Alphonse
Kamanzi, Amelia Alex, and Inna Fain (Brutality and Civil Rights
Project). Ms.
Fain replaces Karim Wahid, who is now in law school.
Prison
Finance Facts
· The current
DOC operating budget
is $542,581,000.
· DOC is
spending $66
million on programs this year, 12% of its budget. This is up from 3% of
its
budget in 2004.
· Staff costs
are 68% of the
DOC budget.
· Prisoner
medical costs are
19% of the DOC budget, or $104 million.
CRA Addresses a
Fraction of The Problem
Eighty
to ninety percent of prisoners have a history
of substance abuse.
This
would be between eight and
nine thousand DOC prisoners.
Yet
the Correctional
Recovery Academy
Wanted:
Art Against Prisons
Wisconsin
Books to Prisoners is looking for
donations of artwork about prison life. Artwork will be displayed at
the end of
January 2009 along with posters created for Critical Resistance, a
prison
abolitionist movement. Please do not send anything that you need
returned or
which is not copyright free. Also send with any submissions directions
as to
how you should be identified. Donations of artwork are welcome at other
times
as well and are used for public education. Submissions can be sent to
Wisconsin Books to
Prisoners, Rainbow Bookstore, 426 W. Gilman St ,
Madison , WI 53703
“Fixing” the Over
- Classification Disaster
Percentage
of DOC
Prisoners in Maximum, Medium and Minimum Security, ’03-’07.
2003
2008
Maximum 17%
16%
Medium
73%
73%
Minimum
10%
11%
Apuntes
de MCLS
está disponible en español
MCLS Notes is available in Spanish. Please share this information with Spanish-speaking prisoners. Por favor informe a los presos que hablan español. MCLS has also translated many of its information packets into Spanish. También hemos traducido muchos de nuestras hojas informativas, los cuales son disponibles a personas que las piden. They will be provided, where available, to people who request them over the phone or in writing. Aceptamos cartas escritas en español y tambien llamadas.
Speed Dial phone number for MCLS
for state prisoners: *9004#
MCLS has arranged with the DOC for
a toll free speed dial number
that is accessible to all state prisoners on the
PIN system. County
prisoners must call collect on (617) 482-4124.
Families and friends of prisoners
can also call MCLS for free on
1-800-882-1413 toll free from anywhere in the state. Prisoners who
cannot reach
us by phone should write to: MCLS / Prisoners Legal Services, Eight
Winter St.,
Regular call-in hours are 1:00 to
4:00 on Monday afternoons unless it
is an emergency, in which case you can call whenever you can get a
phone during
business hours (9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M., Monday to Friday). On weeks
when Monday
is a holiday, MCLS accepts calls on Tuesday from 1:00 to 4:00.
En
la oficina de MCLS (Servicios Legales para Prisioneros) se habla
español. El
número directo de MCLS para los presos del DOC es *9004#. Los presos de
los
condados deben llamar el número (617) 482-4124 (a carga reversada).