Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Civil Rights — Eighth Amendment

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 18, 2014//

Civil Rights — Eighth Amendment

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 18, 2014//

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Civil

Civil Rights — Eighth Amendment

The imposition of a BAP violated a prisoner’s due process rights by imposing an atypical and significant hardship compared to the ordinary incidents of prison life, without appropriate notice and an opportunity to be heard.

“Between June 24, 2005 and March 31, 2006 (when he was transferred to another facility), Townsend was subjected to different BAPs for 259 days.4 During that time, his property and privileges were severely constrained. For at least ninety of those days, he was either naked or issued only a paper gown or segregation smock. He was denied a regular mattress for 106 days, and was not allowed sheets or a pillow for almost the entirety of the BAP period. When he did not have a regular mattress, he slept on either a rubber mat or a concrete slab. Cold air blew into his cell from the ventilation system and Townsend was often very cold. He walked non-stop around his cell in an attempt to keep warm. He was allowed out of his cell for one hour per week to read his mail and write letters. He was not allowed access to toiletries or a towel for almost the entirety of his confinement under the BAP. That meant he had no toilet paper (or at times only a very small amount of toilet paper), no soap to wash his hands, and no toothpaste or toothbrush. For 136 days, he was denied writing materials in his cell, and his access to books and mail was severely restricted. For a lengthy period, he was given his meals in a bag, to eat with his hands, rather than a meal tray with utensils that was provided to other prisoners. For a period of weeks (he does not specify how many), Townsend was entirely naked and provided with no clothing, bedding, linen, mattress or shoes.”

Affirmed in part, and Vacated in part.

12-3620 Townsend v. Cooper

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Gorence, Mag. J., Rovner, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests