American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 42, Issue 1, pp 69–85 | Cite as

An Analysis of CRIPA Findings Letters Issued to Jails for Constitutional Violations by the Department of Justice

Article

Abstract

This study analyzes Findings Letters in jail Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) cases for the years 1993 through 2013 to improve our understanding of the prevalence, content and correlates of constitutional violations investigated by the Department of Justice. CRIPA authorizes the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate and file suit against local jail facilities for the unconstitutional conditions of individuals in their care. Investigating the allegations and providing local officials a Findings Letter are the first steps in a CRIPA action and determine what remedial action must be taken to avoid a federal lawsuit. The analysis revealed a high incidence of certain constitutional violations, longitudinal trends, and facility characteristics associated with CRIPA action.

Keywords

Jail Constitutional violations CRIPA Findings letters 

References

  1. American Correctional Association (ACA). (2010). Core jail standards. East Peoria, IL: Versa Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barczyk, A., & Davis, K. (2009). Analysis of the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) of 1980: the current avenue for protecting individuals in institutions. Journal of Policy Practice, 8, 188–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blalock, B., & Arthur, P. (2006). Advocates needed to safeguard rights of youth in DOC conditions cases. Youth Law News, 27, 1–5.Google Scholar
  4. Carlson, P. M., & Garrett, J. S. (1999). Prison and jail administration: practice and theory. Gaithersburg, Maryland: Aspen Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Carson, E. A. (2014). Prisoners in 2013. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  6. Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 et seq.Google Scholar
  7. Clem, C., Gordon, C., Sheanin, D., & Smith, T. (2006). Direct supervision jails 2006 sourcebook. Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections.Google Scholar
  8. Farbstein, J., & Wener, R. E. (1989). A comparison of “direct” and “indirect” supervision correctional facilities. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections Prison Division.Google Scholar
  9. Geller, J., & Lee, L. (2013). Department of justice finding letters in psychiatric hospital CRIPA cases. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 41, 174–190.Google Scholar
  10. Heuer, G. F. (1993). Direct supervision. American Jails, 7, 57–60.Google Scholar
  11. Hu, S. (2010). NJDC fact sheet: using the civil rights of institutionalized persons act to protect detained and incarcerated youth. Washington, DC: National Juvenile Defender Center.Google Scholar
  12. James, D. J., & Glaze, L. E. (2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates (NCJ 213600). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  13. Krauth, B. K. (1997). A review of the jail function within state unified corrections systems. Longmont, CO: National Institute of Corrections.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, R. & Clem, C. (2011). ACA’s core jail standards focus on the basis. National jail exchange. National Institute of Corrections. Available at http://NICIC.gov/NationalJailExchange.
  15. National Council on Disabilities. (2005). The civil rights of institutionalized persons act: has it fulfilled its promise? Washington, DC: National Council on Disability.Google Scholar
  16. Noonan, M. E., Rohloff, H., & Ginder, S. (2015). Mortality in local jails and state prisons, 2000–2013 – Statistical tables. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  17. Oahu Community Correctional Center. (2007). Office for civil rights letter of finding. U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  18. Phillips, R. L., & Roberts, J. W. (2000). Quick reference to correctional administration. Gaitherersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Ruddell, R., & Mays, G. L. (2007). Rural jails: problematic inmates, overcrowded cells, and cash-strapped counties. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 251–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schlanger, M. (2003). Inmate litigation: results of a national survey. LJN Exchange: the journal of NIC’s large jail network. Longmont, CO: National Institute of Corrections.Google Scholar
  21. Solomon, A., Osborne, J., LoBuglio, S., Mellow, J., & Mukamal, D. (2008). Life after lockup: improving reentry from jail to the community. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance.Google Scholar
  22. Stephan, J. & Walsh, G. (2011). Census of jail facilities, 2006. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  23. Stinchcomb, J. B., & Campbell, S. W. (2007). Jail leaders speak: current and future challenges to jail administration and operations. A summary report to the bureau of justice assistance. Naples, FL: The Center for Innovative Public Policies.Google Scholar
  24. Stolz, B. A. (2015). The growth of federal criminal justice policy making: the role of U.S. civil rights legislation. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26, 463–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Strait, S., & Ahlborn, T. (2009). New “core jail standards” provide sheriffs and jail managers with much-needed guidance. Corrections Today, 71, 60–63.Google Scholar
  26. U.S. Department of Justice. (2001). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2001. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  27. U.S. Department of Justice. (2002). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2002. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  28. U.S. Department of Justice. (2003). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2003. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  29. U.S. Department of Justice. (2004). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2004. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  30. U.S. Department of Justice. (2005). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2005. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  31. U.S. Department of Justice. (2006). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2006. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  32. U.S. Department of Justice. (2007). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2007. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  33. U.S. Department of Justice. (2008). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2008. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  34. U.S. Department of Justice. (2009). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2009. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  35. U.S. Department of Justice. (2010). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2010. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  36. U.S. Department of Justice. (2011). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2011. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  37. U.S. Department of Justice. (2012). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized persons act: fiscal year 2012. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  38. U.S. Department of Justice. (2013). Department of justice activities under the civil rights of institutionalized person act: fiscal year 2013. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  39. U.S. Department of Justice. (2015). Civil rights division, special litigation, corrections, cases and matters. Available at http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/findsettle.php#corrections.
  40. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2009). U.S. Department of Justice: information on employment litigation, housing and civil enforcement, voting, and special litigation sections’ enforcement efforts from fiscal years 2001 through 2007 (GAO-10-75). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  41. University of Michigan Law School’s Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. (2015). Available at: http://www.clearinghouse.net.
  42. Wallenstein, A. (1987). New generation/direct supervision correctional operations in bucks county, Pennsylvania. American Jails, 1, 34–36.Google Scholar
  43. Welsh, W. N. (1995). Counties in court: jail overcrowding and court-ordered reform. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Wener, R. E., Farbstein, J., & Knapel, C. (1993). Post occupancy evaluations: improving correctional facility design. Corrections Today, 55, 96–103.Google Scholar
  45. Wener, R. E., & Olsen, R. (1980). Innovative correctional environments: a user assessment. Environment and Behavior, 12, 478–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Williams, J. L., Rodeheaver, D., & Huggins, D. (1999). A comparative evaluation of a new generation jail. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 223–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zupan, L. L., & Stohr-Gillmore, M. K. (1988). Doing time in the new generation jail: inmate perceptions of gains and losses. Policy Studies Review, 7, 626–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.John Jay College of Criminal JusticeNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.The Urban InstituteWashington, D.C.USA

Personalised recommendations