Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Hodges v. Klein
562 F.2d 276
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1977-09-19
- Topic
- bankruptcy
OPINION OF THE COURT PER CURIAM. In this appeal, the operation of the Management Control Unit [MCU] of Trenton State Prison, to which prisoners deemed in need of close supervision are assigned, is challenged as violative of the proscription against cruel and unusual punishment and as a violation of the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution. Appellants, inmates who are or have been assigned to the MCU, appeal from the district court’s denial of an injunction ordering that the MCU be closed or operated differently. Appellants’ due process claim should be examined in light of Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 96 S.Ct. 2532, 49 L.Ed.2d 451 (1976), and Montayne v.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Hodges v. Klein. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 14 opinions
HODGES v. KLEIN,562 F.2d 276(3rd Cir. 1977)
LOUIS W. HODGES, ERNEST R. PACE, DAVID G. BALDWIN, JEROME BOULDING, THEODORE
GIBSON, ELLIOT HAMPTON, CHARLES HOLMAN, ELLISON JONES, GEORGE MARTIN, ROBERT
MATTHEWS, KENNETH ROBERTS, THOMAS RUMPH, JOHN SCOTT, THADDEUS SPRINGS,
CALVIN STROTHERS, AND CURTIS TILLMAN, JOHN WASHINGTON, CHARLES E. ALLEN, #
56176, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED WHO ARE OR
HAVE EVER BEEN ASSIGNED AND TRANSFERRED TO THE MANAGEMENT CONTROL UNIT OF
THE TRENTON STATE PRISON, APPELLANTS, v. ANN KLEIN, COMMISSIONER OF THE NEW
JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF INSTITUTIONS AND AGENCIES, WILLIAM H. FAUVER, DIRECTOR
OF THE DIVISION OF CORRECTION AND PAROLE IN THE NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF
INSTITUTIONS AND AGENCIES, RICHARD A. SEIDL, SUPERVISING SUPERINTENDENT OF
THE STATE PRISON COMPLEX, DIVISION OF CORRECTION AND PAROLE, NEW JERSEY
DEPARTMENT OF INSTITUTIONS AND AGENCIES, ALAN R. HOFFMAN, SUPERINTENDENT OF
THE STATE PRISON AT TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, WILLIAM ANDERSON, CHIEF DEPUTY AND
SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE MEMBER OF THE STATE PRISON AT TRENTON, NEW
JERSEY, ROBERT G. SIMMONS, CORRECTIONS CAPTAIN OF THE STATE PRISON AT
TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, LAWRENCE ASHTON, CORRECTIONS LIEUTENANT AND CHIEF OF
THE MANAGEMENT CONTROL UNIT OF THE STATE PRISON AT TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, STAN
SAMUELSON, DIRECTOR OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION
COMMITTEE MEMBER OF THE STATE PRISON AT TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, E. CALVIN
NEUBERT, SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE MEMBER OF THE STATE PRISON AT
TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, JOHN DOE, SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE MEMBER OF
THE STATE PRISON AT TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, TOM FOE, SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION
COMMITTEE MEMBER OF THE STATE PRISON AT TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, ALL
INDIVIDUALLY AND IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITIES.
Page 277
JOHN WASHINGTON, APPELLANT, v. ALAN R. HOFFMAN, SUPERINTENDENT, NEW JERSEY
STATE PRISON AT TRENTON, NEW JERSEY. CHARLES E. ALLEN, # 56176, APPELLANT,
v. ANN KLEIN, COMMISSIONER, DEPT. OF INSTITUTIONS AGENCIES, INDIVIDUALLY
AND IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY, ALAN R. HOFFMAN, SUPERINTENDENT, TRENTON
STATE PRISON, TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY, WILLIAM ANDERSON, CHIEF DEPUTY AND MEMBER OF THE SPECIAL
CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE AT TRENTON STATE PRISON, TRENTON, NEW JERSEY,
INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY, E. CALVIN NEUBERT, SPECIAL
CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE MEMBER AT TRENTON STATE PRISON, TRENTON, NEW
JERSEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY, STAN SAMUELSON,
DIRECTOR OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE
MEMBER AT TRENTON STATE PRISON, TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN
THIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY.
No. 76-2662.
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Under Third Circuit Rule 12(6) September 9, 1977.
Decided September 19, 1977.
William F. Hyland, Atty. Gen. of New Jersey, Trenton, N. J., Stephen Skillman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Trenton, N. J., of counsel, Joseph T. Maloney, Deputy Atty. Gen., Trenton, N. J., on the brief, for appellees.
[1] OPINION OF THE COURT
Before ALDISERT, ROSENN and GARTH, Circuit Judges.
[3] Appellants' due process claim should be examined in light ofMeachum v. Fano,427 U.S. 215, 96 S.Ct. 2532, 49 L.Ed.2d 451 (1976), andMontayne v. Haymes,427 U.S. 236, 96 S.Ct. 2543, 49 L.Ed.2d 466 (1976), in which the Supreme Court determined that inmate transfers were not subject to a hearing requirement, even when, as inMeachum, supra,the transfer was to a less desirable confinement situation. The presence in this case of procedures for periodic hearings to review an inmate's assignment to the MCU leads us to conclude that appellants' due process rights were adequately safeguarded.
[4] Appellants further claim that assignment to the Management Control Unit violates the equal protection clause by depriving them of certain freedoms and privileges enjoyed by the general inmate population. If the challenged classification furthers some legitimate state interest, however, it will withstand an equal protection challenge.McGinnis v. Royster,410 U.S. 263, 270, 93 S.Ct. 1055, 35 L.Ed.2d 282 (1973). Given the district court's factual findings regarding the considerable tension and an unusual number of discipline problems within the prison, it is clear that classifications among prisoners maintained the discipline and security in the prison and thus furthered a legitimate state interest.
[5] Appellants' claim that the MCU subjects inmates to cruel and unusual punishment, viewed under the standard discussed inFurman v. Georgia,408 U.S. 238, 92 S.Ct. 2726, 33 L.Ed.2d 346 (1972) (Brennan, J., concurring at 282), similarly must fail.
[6] For these reasons, aptly elaborated in the district court opinion by the Honorable Clarkson S. Fisher,421 F. Supp. 1224(D.N.J., 1976), the judgment of the district court will be affirmed.Page 870