Lekas v. Briley.U.S. Appeals CourtCONDITIONS OF SEGREGATION Lekas v. Briley, 405 F.3d 602 (7th Cir. 2005). A state inmate INMATE. One who dwells in a part of another's house, the latter dwelling, at the same time, in the said house. Kitch. 45, b; Com. Dig. Justices of the Peace, B 85; 1 B. & Cr. 578; 8 E. C. L. R. 153; 2 Dowl. & Ry. 743; 8 B. & Cr. 71; 15 E. C. L. R. 154; 2 Man. & Ry. 227; 9 B. & Cr. sued several prison officials under [section] 1983, alleging constitutional violations stemming from his placement and confinement con·fine·ment n. 1. The act of restricting or the state of being restricted in movement. 2. Lying-in. confinement in disciplinary segregation. The district court dismissed the case and the inmate appealed. The appeals court affirmed af·firm v. af·firmed, af·firm·ing, af·firms v.tr. 1. To declare positively or firmly; maintain to be true. 2. To support or uphold the validity of; confirm. v.intr. . The appeals court held that the inmate's alleged conditions of disciplinary segregation at the prison were not so atypical atypical /atyp·i·cal/ (-i-k'l) irregular; not conformable to the type; in microbiology, applied specifically to strains of unusual type. a·typ·i·cal adj. and significant as to constitute a deprivation of a liberty interest. The inmate alleged that while in segregation he was unable to participate in prison programs, educational programs, work programs, and contact visits. (Pinckneyville Correction Center, Illinois) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion