Daniels v. Woodside.U.S. Appeals Court EDUCATIONAL JUVENILES Daniels v. Woodside, 396 F.3d 730 (6th Cir. 2005). A juvenile who had been detained de·tain tr.v. de·tained, de·tain·ing, de·tains 1. To keep from proceeding; delay or retard. 2. To keep in custody or temporary confinement: at a county jail on a murder charge brought a [section] 1983 action alleging violation of a state law governing pretrial pre·tri·al n. A proceeding held before an official trial, especially to clarify points of law and facts. adj. 1. Of or relating to a pretrial. 2. detention of juveniles, and violation of due process when he was expelled from an alternative education program. The district court granted summary judgment for a sheriff and school district, but denied it for a school superintendent Noun 1. school superintendent - the superintendent of a school system overseer, superintendent - a person who directs and manages an organization . The juvenile and the superintendent appealed. The appeals court affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part. The court found no violation of state law, where the law provided an exception for housing dangerous juveniles in jails, and the statutory requirements of sight and sound separation were followed. The court held that conditions of confinement con·fine·ment n. 1. The act of restricting or the state of being restricted in movement. 2. Lying-in. confinement deriving from the juvenile's classification as a suicide risk did not constitute punishment prohibited by the Due Process Clause, or cruel and unusual punishment Such punishment as would amount to torture or barbarity, any cruel and degrading punishment not known to the Common Law, or any fine, penalty, confinement, or treatment that is so disproportionate to the offense as to shock the moral sense of the community. . The juvenile was subjected to 24-hour lock-down, deprived of exercise, dressed in a suicide gown that did not close in the back, denied access to a shower and personal hygiene personal hygiene person n → Körperhygiene f products, and denied visitors. The court found that the juvenile, who dropped out of high school when he attained the age of 16, did not have a protected property interest in attending an alternative high school program offered by the school district, and therefore the due process claim against the superintendent was precluded. (Macomb County Jail, Michigan) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion