Austin v. Wilkinson.

U.S. Appeals Court

CLASSIFICATION

ISOLATION

LEGAL ASSISTANCE

EXERCISE

Austin v. Wilkinson, 372 F.3d 346 (6th Cir. 2004). State inmates housed at a supermaximum security prison facility brought a class action against corrections officials under [section] 1983, alleging violations of their procedural due process rights. The district court ruled that officials had violated the inmates' due process right and granted injunctive relief. The court ordered the adoption of a revised version of placement regulations and the officials appealed. The appeals court affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded. The appeals court held that state inmates enjoyed a due process protected liberty interest in not being placed at a supermaximum facility, absent the satisfaction of state-mandated substantive predicates, but that the district court did not have the power to order state officials to modify their predicates. The appeals court upheld the procedural modifications made by the district court to the state's placement and retention policies, which included increased notice requirements and changes to the administrative appellate procedure. The court noted past erroneous and haphazard placements at the facility, and the availability of administrative segregation to ensure the state's interest in safety. The appeals court found that the proper comparison was within the state's prison system, not between other supermaximum facilities in other states. The court held that confinement at the supermaximum facility imposed an atypical and significant hardship, given the extreme isolation visited upon inmates, lack of outdoor recreation, limitations on personal property rights and access to telephone and counsel, and ineligibility for parole. (Ohio State Penitentiary. Youngstown)