|
Welcome: The above photograph of James Hamm and Donna Leone Hamm, leaders of the agency, includes the flag of the United States as a means of indicating that Middle Ground Prison Reform seeks to cloak prisoners and their families and supporters in the protections afforded to everyone by the United States Constitution. The photo and the use of the flag is not intended to be disrespectful in any manner and, in fact, the use of our country's flag as a cloak for an advocate of prisoner rights' is firmly protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, for which we have the deepest regard.
Mission Statement: To protect and define the rights, responsibilities, and privileges of the incarcerated. We support genuine efforts at rehabilitation of criminal offenders, which, in turn, fully restores them to our communities, promotes family stability, authentic long-term public safety, and reduces the numbers of crime victims in our society. We engage in efforts to hold government agencies and their agents accountable for the tax dollars used to support prisons, jails, and other criminal justice activities. We perform this work via public education, legislative advocacy, litigation, and referral to existing social services. We serve as a clearinghouse for relevant information affecting the incarcerated and their supporters.
***********************************************************************************************************************
***********************************************************************************************************************
For prompt response to questions : middlegroundprisonreform@msn.com (IMPORTANT NOTE: Due to increased costs associated with the time it takes to respond to the myriad of e-mail inquiries we receive each day, the cost of operating our web site, and the general expenses associated with phones, computers, office supplies, etc., we have instituted a new policy, effective immediately. If you e-mail us with a question or issue which can be responded to without research, legwork, volunteer staff time (except to respond), then we will not expect a fee/donation for the service. If, however, your request requires contacting others to attempt to resolve your problem, performing legal or prison policy research on your individualized concern or issue, visiting with or advocating with other state agencies or persons, we will expect a donation to Middle Ground in the minimum amount of $20.00 for each e-mail you send which requests assistance that cannot be provided "off the cuff." Donations in larger amounts are always welcome, too. You can make the donation from our "Support Middle Ground's Work" page - via PayPal. We are sorry we need to institute this policy, but -- like all non-profit agencies -- we require operating funds to keep the organization viable and we feel that it is not too much to expect a small donation when we are giving so much of our time/effort/expertise to others. We thank you in advance for understanding.
Middle Ground is an all-volunteer organization; no salaries are paid to staff. We rely entirely on donations to pay expenses and to keep the organization operating.
**********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
***********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Why Middle Ground supports post-secondary educational programming in prison: CLICK HERE
LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF HB2298 FILED: Middle Ground, on behalf of all prisoners in the Arizona Department of Corrections who are assigned to WIPP jobs, filed a lawsuit in the District Court of Arizona on September 10, 2007. The lawsuit seeks class action certification and challenges the provisions of recently passed HB 2298, which authorizes the ADOC to deduct 5% of earned wages from each and every prisoner in the Arizona DOC, no matter what crime they are convicted of and no matter how long they will be in prison. HB 2298 provides for programs which apply to and benefit drug offenders only. During legislative hearings on the bill, the DOC testified that they planned to collect about $650,000/year in inmate wages via the deductions, and that about 653 inmates/year would qualify or receive benefits from the provisions of the bill. At the present time, about 36,000+ inmates are in the Arizona prison system, and an estmated 25,000 of those prisoners are assigned to paid-work jobs.
We assert that the wage deductions violate the Takings Clause of the Constitution, as well as violate Due Process. HB 2298 goes into effect on Sept. 19, 2007, and we will likely not be able to prohibit its implementation. However, deducted wages might be subject to reimbursement if the law is declared unconstitutional as we suspect it will. To download a copy of the complaint (13 pages) click on COMPLAINT CHALLENGING HB 2298.
We urge you to download the complaint and mail it to someone you know inside the prison.
Note: Only nine (9) Plaintiffs were required in order to file the lawsuit. However, because it is a declaratory judgment lawsuit and we seek class action certification, the ruling will affect all "similarly situated" prisoners, and not just those who are named Plaintiffs. This method of litigation is much more economical for us to manage. Middle Ground is supporting the filing fees and process serving for this litigation, as well as assisting the attorney, Scott Ambrose, in legal research and writing. NO OTHER PLAINTIFFS ARE REQUESTED AT THIS TIME.
Update on litigation: The Defendants were served on 9/14/07. Two defendants (the Governor and the Attorney General) are named. The court determined that the Defendants were required to file an Answer, and they did so on October 19, 2007.. Of course, the State denies all allegations and claims that their intentions are pristine and that many thousands of prisoners will "benefit" from the drug offender transition programs. The Judge issued a Scheduling Order which we are following: By April 1, 2008, all motions to amend the Complaint, join additional parties or other procedural motions must be filed. By April 1 and May 1, all expert witnesses must be revealed by the Plaintiffs and the Defendants respectively. All discovery for both sides must be concluded by June 30, 2008. All supplemental discovery is due by August 15, and all dispositive motions must be filed by August 29, 2008. If the case cannot be settled by dispositive motions (Motion for Summary Judgment), then the case would be set for trial. Meanwhile, the wage deductions have begun and our named Plaintiffs are continuing to advise us of the actual wage deductions they are experiencing. No decision has yet been made by the Court to determine whether or not this case will be certified as a class action lawsuit. At the present time, the case is being handled as a Declaratory Judgment action.
We will continue to post updates as applicable. Posted April 3, 2008. ####
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN INFORMATION ABOUT THE FEDERAL CRACK COCAINE RETROACTIVITY PROCESS (THIS APPLIES TO FEDERALLY-SENTENCED PRISONERS ONLY) SEE OUR FAQ SECTION AND OUR NEWS/RUMOR CONTROL SECTION.
####
CLICK ON THIS LINK TO SEE INDIANA NEWSPAPER COVERAGE OF THE NEW CASTLE PRISON RIOT Indianopolis Star Newspaper Report on Prison Riot OR CLICK ON THIS LINK TO VIEW INDIANA DOC'S OFFICIAL REPORT ON THE PRISON RIOT AT THE NEW CASTLE PRIVATE PRISON: Indiana DOC Report To Dora Schriro. Note: Arizona DOC has conducted it's own investigation and haswritten a report, but -- curiously -- unlike the Indiana DOC, Arizona is not making it's own report public. We suspect Arizona DOC's reasons for refusing to publish its internal report have to do with the lack of accountability that Arizona prison officials have demonstrated in accepting their share of responsibility for the failure to insure that New Castle Private Prison was ready to accept prisoners when Arizona shipped them there.
####
DOWNLOAD
THE ABOVE 35-PAGE REPORT FOR INNOVATIVE AND EFFECTIVE IDEAS FOR PRISON
AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM!! (2003) PLEASE CLICK ON
THE ABOVE PURPLE BOX. Several of the suggestions
from our report have been proposed as legislative bills
during subsequent (2004 - 2007) Legislative sessions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For access to a newly published report of The Commission on Safety and Abuse in American's Prisons, entitled "CONFRONTING CONFINEMENT," CLICK HERE! The full report is over 100 pages in length, but you can download or read only the recommendations if you prefer. The commission study was sponsored by the Vera Institute, New York, NY.
_____________________________________________________________________________
DO YOU NEED ASSISTANCE IN INTERVIEWING/HIRING AN ATTORNEY ?
LAWYERS ARE SUPPOSED TO HOLD A SPECIAL POSITON OF TRUST IN OUR COURT SYSTEM. FOR ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW POORLY ARIZONA LAWYERS POLICE THEMSELVES: See Arizona Republic article, June 26, 2006
We do not advocate violence of any sort to resolve problems. Here is one prisoner who found a way, however, to be appointed a new public defender after his attorney apparently advised the court that his client "doesn't get to choose who he wants as his attorney." CLICK HERE Not only will the (assaulted) attorney have to be removed from the case (he is now a witness/victim of his own client), but the prisoner will face new criminal charges.
TIPS FOR RETAINING A CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR YOUR CASE AND PROTECTING YOURSELF FROM UNETHICAL OR UNPROFESSIONAL LAWYERS:
Prior to your first consultation appointment, visit the State Bar of Arizona website and click on "Working with an Attorney, " to deterine if the attorney you are meeting with has any past serious disciplinary information posted. Depending upon the nature of the discipline, you can use your own judgment about whether you wish to proceed to retain this attorney. Feel free to ask him or her questions about the disciplinary action and what steps the attorney has taken to insure that the infraction or conduct will not occur in the future. If the attorney refuses to discuss these matters with you, especially since the information is posted as a public record, you need to decide if this is someone you want to trust with your own legal problems or needs. See: http://www.azbar.org/legalresources/findlawyer.cfm. Follow the prompts.
The Arizona Bar information, however, will give you only minimal information; no details about what the lawyer did to result in the discipline will be revealed. To obtain the full details of any lawyer's behavior which led to disciplinary action, you must visit the Arizona Supreme Court website or contact the State Bar. Only the Supreme Court can impose discipline; the State Bar can only recommend it.
The State Bar publishes suggested questions for someone to ask when a person is preparing to retain an attorney. Those questions are listed on their web site, also under the tab, "Working With An Attorney." However, the Bar's suggested questions are not very probing, seem rather superficial, and clearly do not provide sufficient, detailed information, especially when one considers that hiring an attorney -- especially for a criminal matter -- often means placing a second mortgage on a house, dipping into retirement accounts or life savings; etc. We suggest, when hiring a criminal defense attorney, that you add to the State Bar's suggested questions by asking:
1. Have you ever been the subject of a state bar or supreme court disciplinary action of any type?* In Arizona? In any other state or jurisdiction in which you've practiced law?
2. If so, what was it and where can I read about it? Will you give me a copy of the final decision?
3. What complaint is most often made about you or your firm from your clients?
4. What have you done (or are you doing) to resolve those concerns?
5. Can I receive a hard copy of all the records on my case each time you file something with the court, or communicate with the state? If not, why not? If so, will I be charged for those copies?
6. Can I give you a direct order that I don't wish to waive my presence at any court appearances, no matter how minor they seem to you, on my case? If not, why not? For what types of hearings would you ordinarly waive an appearance of your client? Or, another way of addressing the same issue is:
7. If I tell you now, before I hire you, that I want to be included in all in camera conferences in the judge's chambers which involve my case, will you agree to insure that I am present for such conferences? If not, why not?
8. If you or your family are told (prior to retaining the attorney) that he/she can get the client out of (jail/prison) within a specific amount of time, ask: Will you put that guarantee in writing with an agreement to refund my fee in full if you do not succeed? If not, why not? Have I misunderstood something you said?
9. If I am convicted of (these) charges, at what point will you file a Notice of Withdrawal as my attorney of record? Before filing the Notice of Appeal/PCR? If so, who will file the Notices which involve time-dated deadlines?
10. If I am convicted of (these) charges (or agree to a plea agreement), will you insure that I have at least 48 hours to review the entire PSR (Presentence Investigation Report) prior to the sentencing hearing, so that I can insure that it is complete and accurate? If I find significant errors, will you assure me that these errors will be incorporated into a Revised/Amended PSR which will be attached by court order to the original PSR, so that the Department of Corrections will have both the original and the corrected version for its files?
11. Will you put the above agreements/provisions in your Fee Agreement/Contract? If not, why not?
12. When clients compliment you on your representation, what types of comments do they make?
13. Can I or my family tape record meetings with you to insure that we correctly remember the contents of our conversations? If not, why not? Do you object to my taking notes on our conversations?
14. Are you familiar with A.R.S. 13-603 (L)? Please explain it to me. (Note: This is a statute which allows the defense attorney -- at the time of sentencing only -- to request that the sentencing judge issue an Order which permits the defendant to apply to the Board of Executive Clemency for a sentence reduction IF, AND ONLY IF, THE JUDGE BELIEVES THAT THE SENTENCE TO BE IMPOSED IS 'CLEARLY EXCESSIVE.' This statute would not apply, for example, to someone who is sentenced to the super-mitigated term of imprisonment, etc.) If a criminal defense attorney indicates that he/she is not familiar with ARS 13-603 (L), think carefully about hiring that individual. It would mean that the person really doesn't extend himself for his clients and isn't up-to-date on all factors which affect a client's sentencing hearing.
15. Will you be the person working on my case, or will the case be assigned to an associate attorney who works in your office? How much work can I expect YOU to perform on the case? Who will appear in court on the case -- you or your associate?
* NOTE: A state bar or supreme court disciplinary action is different from a state bar complaint. Anyone can file a complaint, and many do. Many complaints are simply unfounded or are filed by a disgruntled client. An actual disciplinary action (which can result in anything from an informal reprimand all the way up to complete disbarment) means that the original complaint was found to have merit and that action was ultimately taken against the lawyer to impose consequences of some type for that behavior. From start to finish, especially in a claim that has merit, the process of disciplining a licensed attorney is a very slow process.
Is it advisable to be wary of or refuse to hire an attorney who has been previously disciplined while serving as an officer of the court in a position of the highest trust? Often, yes. Only you and your family can be the judge. Remember, ask questions and get all agreements in writing -- especially if the attorney promises a particular outcome to your case. As previously stated above, for example, if the attorney says, "I'll get him out in six months" (if you'll just write that check and hire me), ask the attorney to put that promise in writing with a money-back guarantee. Read every word of every document before signing it. A Fee Agreement is a legal contract, just as a Plea Agreement is a legal contract.
If you decide you are not pleased with the services of an attorney you have already hired, you can fire him. Call him by telephone, but ALSO put the information in WRITING and send it by certified mail to the attorney. Tell him on the telephone and in writing to cease working on your case immediately and to submit to you an itemized account of all fees he has expended (against the retainer or fee you have already paid). You should expect to receive such accounting within 30 days. Ask for all records of the case to be returned to you (arrange to pick them up in person, if possible). If you feel that the attorney has charged you far too much money and has not been able to account for it by demonstrating actual work on your case, you can file a complaint with the State Bar "Fee Arbitration" section. This process will not move quickly, so don't count on return of any funds from one attorney before you can hire another, but sometimes the Bar does order the attorney to refund portions of fees that are considered to be excessive when compared with the amount of work performed. Contact the State Bar of Arizona for forms that allow the fee arbitration process to commence.
###
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DID YOU KNOW THAT MIDDLE GROUND PRISON REFORM IS THE ONLY ORGANIZATION IN ARIZONA THAT IS LEGALLY AUTHORIZED TO LOBBY THE STATE LEGISLATURE SOLELY FOR PRISON REFORM ISSUES? WE ARE THE OLDEST AND MOST CONSISTENT ORGANIZATION DEALING WITH PRISON REFORM -- WE HAVE EXPERIENCE IN CORRECTIONS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM SINCE 1981!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DON'T BE PRESSURED BY THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS TO PURCHASE RECORDS THAT YOU DON'T REALLY WANT OR NEED!
Due to medical information/records privacy laws, in order to obtain medical or psychological records for an inmate (whether you are a family member, an attorney, or other), you must first obtain a signed and witnessed "Medical Information Release Authorization Form" from the inmate. The inmate him/herself can obtain the form from the Medical Dept. at the prison, fill it out and send it to you or, for attorneys, you can use your own form which the Department must recognize. A regular "Power of Attorney" form isn't recognized by the Department as adequate to provide access to medical records.
After the inmate signs the original of the form and sends it to you, a COPY of it (keep the original) is forwarded to the Arizona Dept. of Corrections to request the desired records. Their address is: 1110 W. Washington, Suite 310, Phoenix, Arizona 85007. The telephone is: 602) 364-2941. The fax is: (602) 364-2956. At this point, the Department will count ALL the pages in the entire inmate's record and send you an invoice for each page, at $.25/page. Don't pay it unless you want the entire record. If, instead, you wish to examine the files and pick certain pages for a specific time frame or illness, you are permitted to do so even though the Department will not inform you of this! They make you jump through several obstacles to personally examine records, not the least of which is the current requirement that you personally examine the records at the physical location of the prison where the inmate is currently housed (no word on how they would handle such a request for an inmate who is housed out-of-state), so it requires stamina, patience and time.
For inmates who have been incarcerated for years or who have serious medical problems, the medical/psychological files might be extremely voluminous. Therefore, paying for all of the records might run into the hundreds of dollars. You don't have to pay this charge unless you truly desire all of the records. It is a way for the Department to: (1) be lazy, so that they don't have to deal with the inconvenience of a personal visitor who will sit in one of their offices as they examine a file; (2) make money from family, friends or attorneys for inmates (who pass along the cost of the records to their clients).
We have also discovered other problems when obtaining authorized medical/psychological records from the ADOC. Be sure to insist that they collect/obtain records from all of their scattered files -- Institutional, Master Record, Medical/Mental Health, Hospital and all other files. Also, when you examine the files (either in person or after you pay for all of them before seeing any of them), be sure to confirm that the records are up-to-date. Our experience is that even when personally examining medical files, the latest entries are sometimes several months old at the time of examination. What this really means is that the ADOC is maintaining yet another file on this particular inmate's medical record that they have not shared with the requesting party.
Finally, we have become aware of cases where an inmate has duly authorized a family member to examine and/or purchase copies of his medical/psychological file and -- although the paperwork has been filled out completely and properly -- the DOC staff will inform the inmate that "no one can look at your file." This is false and should be challenged.
If anyone has difficulty obtaining or examining medical/psychological files -- after obtaining the required authorization forms -- please let us know. A "Power of Attorney" is NOT the same as a Medical Information Release Authorization Form.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Is The Arizona Department of Corrections a "Flagship" Agency of State Government?: If you visit the Arizona Department of Corrections web site, you will note that site is replete with information about the employees who donate money to charitable causes, who develop ideas (such as eliminating hard sole shoes for inmates who don't have jobs, which purportedly saves the state $400K/year), and who have died under various circumstances while employed by the Department. There is no information on the web site about how many inmates are serious substance abuse offenders versus how many are enrolled in programs that actually work. No mention is made of how many inmates are returned to the Department after their release for new crimes or for technical violations. No mention is made on the site of how many inmates die or are seriously medically compromised due to the lack of adequate medical care offered by the Department. No mention is made of how many seriously mentally ill prisoners are given actual therapy and/or treatment (drugging an inmate into a stupor does not count as treatment). No mention is made of why formerlly successful programs for integrating prisoners into the community -- such as home furloughs, community visits or other programs -- have not been reinstated by a Director who claims that she wants inmates to have a "parallell universe" with the free world. No mention at all is made of the below listed published articles. The Governor and the Director, Dora Schriro, have challenged the Department to become the "flagship" agency of state government. In other words, employees of the ADOC are expected to take the role as leaders of all state agencies in terms of professionalism, integrity, ethics, etc. In fact, the ADOC has already designated ITSELF as the "flagship" agency of state government, just because it desires to be viewed in this manner. The reader is invited to be the judge:
Arizona Prison Guard Charged With "Green Card" Fraud Scheme
Yuma Prison Captain Caught With Child Porn on Home Computer (Note: Capt. Kangas, 52, was sentenced on 12/22/06 to 100 years in prison -- no doubt to be served in another state. A jury convicted him of possession of multiple counts of child pornography. Kangas was previously known within the Arizona prison system as the lead defendant in the lawsuit, Gluth v. Kangas 951 F.2d 1504 (9th Cir. 1991) which had to do with access to the courts and law libraries in the Central Unit. It is unknown whether Capt. Kangas has changed his opinion about law library/court access or prison reform since his conviction.
Prison Guard Killed Collecting $50 Drug Debt
Arizona
Prison Guard Corruption
Arizona
Prison Guard Helps To Conceal Cop Killer Suspects (Sentenced in November 2005)
Article about American Correctional Assn. (ACA) Winter
Conference, Phoenix, 2005
Featured
Article in Phoenix New Times, "Dora's Darlings" June
3, 2004
Featured
Article in Phoenix New Times, "CLINK", October 23, 2003
Prison guards' corruption occurs in other places besides Arizona: SEE FLORIDA FEDERAL PRISON GUARD SCANDAL
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Can't locate a prisoner or need to know his/her address in an Arizona prison?
Until June 2006, family and friends of prisoners could call a toll-free number to obtain an inmate's address and DOC # without much difficulty. However, all of this has recently changed and it is much more inconvenient (sometimes extremely difficult) to obtain this information. Now, unless you are a victim of a crime, you must call Betty Cassiano at the Arizona Department of Corrections at: (602) 364-3945 or, toll-free at 866-333-2039.!
Victims of crime are treated to very personal, special service by the Department. However, if you are the family, friend or attorney of an inmate, you will simply have to wait until Betty (or whomever will be assigned this duty) finds the time to respond to your call or e-mail.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Do
you know who your state legislators are? If not,
go to Vote
Smart Organization and enter your zip code in the
left-hand column. Middle Ground is the only prisoner
rights' organization that is registered to formally
lobby for prisoner-family rights in Arizona.
******************************************************************************************************************
******************************************************************************************************************
WELCOME
TO OUR WEBSITE: THE VOLUNTEER STAFF OF MIDDLE GROUND
PRISON REFORM CONSISTS OF:
Donna
Leone Hamm*, Judge (Retired) - Executive Director middlegroundprisonreform@msn.com
James
J. Hamm, J.D*. - Director of Advocacy & Program
Services middlegroundprisonreform@msn.com
Our staff also
consists of many other volunteers who provide legal
research, clerical assistance, financial contributions,
legislative advocacy, donations of computer programming
and training, etc., all of whom wish to remain anonymous.
Web
site design and hosting donated by: Mobile Tech Support
and The Cyberimage,
(623) 937-8555
*not
admitted to the practice of law
******************************************************************************************************
The
Balanced Approach
In
Arizona, we spend millions of tax dollars on our prison
system and jail system. We must ensure that those dollars
are being spent wisely, effectively and carefully. We
must define long-term public safety in such a way that
it incorporates concern for the treatment received by
offenders while incarcerated and the impact their treatment
will have on their behavior once they are released into
the community. Long-term public safety MUST be the
goal of any authentic correctional system.
Middle
Ground recognizes that certain individuals are a danger
to the citizens of Arizona and that vigilant incarceration
is a primary concern for these offenders. We also recognize
the necessity of:
-Identifying
those offenders who sincerely wish to become productive,
contributing citizens, and;
-Assisting
them with vigorous efforts to correct themselves while
serving their sentence.
Once
incarcerated, every effort must be made to appropriately
classify those who wish to correct themselves from those
who refuse to change. Ethical, thoughtful, and professional
programs must be offered, and humane treatment provided
for ALL criminal offenders. It is both reasonable and
prudent (in society's best interest) to foster the integration
of corrected offenders into our community. This can
only be accomplished by providing realistic opportunities
for academic and vocational development, and for personal
renewal in psychological and spiritual realms during
the time of incarceration.
Prisons
consist of large aggregations of people with serious
social and/or psychological problems. The staff are
often composed of large aggregations of people who are
either indifferent or -- in far too many cases -- opposed
to the idea of positive change. Many so-called "correctional"
staff simply do not believe that people can change.
This leads to lip service and false impressions regarding
alleged programs of "rehabilitation."
There
are many issues which need to be addressed in the prison
reform arena. Below is a list of some issues, but
clearly is not exhaustive:
·
the philosophy of prison "for" punishment, rather than
"as" punishment
·
brutality imposed on inmates by other inmates, and by
staff on inmates
·
the inhumanity of prison rules, policies, regulations,
practices and day-to-day
treatment
·
institutional indifference to an authentic correctional
plan of action
·
the treatment of the mentally ill and those with serious
medical issues, including
especially the lack of treatment for those with Hep
C, TB and AIDS
·
sexual harassment of female prisoners and sexual violence
in general
·
the lack of training in marketable job skills for prisoners
·
the serious lack of release planning and its consequences
for recidivism
·
the almost insurmountable obstacles faced by released
offenders when they seek
jobs, housing and general acceptance into the community
issues involving protective segregation of vulnerable
prisoners
·
gang violence and management
·
staff training/professionalism/screening/recruitment
·
the lack of commitment to or opportunity for post-secondary
education
·
the use of "super-max" (gulag-type) security units,
and the consequences thereof
Middle
Ground Prison Reform is dedicated to public education,
legislative advocacy and litigation, when necessary,
to protect and define the rights and responsibilities
of prison and jail inmates and their loved ones. We
believe in a middle-of-the-road approach to solving
problems and challenges, rather than one which supports
the extreme of any position.
Note:
Middle Ground does not perform legal work, nor do we "provide"
attorneys to represent clients or classes of clients
in lawsuits, provide legal advice on any issue or
represent clients before any judicial or administrative
body. We are an activist organization (as in above
paragraph). If you desire referral to an attorney,
expert witness, mitigation specialist, or a person who
prepares alternative presentence investigation reports,
please call us at 480 966-8116. Also, see the
section called "Individualized Advocacy" on
this web site.
ARIZONA
PRISONERS ARE PERMITTED BY DOC POLICY (AND BY CASE LAW) TO RECEIVE APPROPRIATE
INFORMATION WHICH HAS BEEN DOWNLOADED FROM THE INTERNET.
IF YOU WISH TO SEND A DOWNLOADED COPY OF ANY INFORMATION
FROM MIDDLE GROUND TO A PRISONER, YOU NEED TO SIMPLY
MARK THE OUTSIDE OF YOUR ENVELOPE TO THE PRISONER:
"PERMITTED INTERNET MATERIALS ENCLOSED." ARIZONA
PRISON OFFICIALS MAY NOT PROHIBIT INTERNET MATERIALS
(SUCH AS CASE LAW, NEWSPAPER ARTICLES, OTHER INTERNET
MATERIALS) AS LONG AS THE MATERIAL BEING SENT IS NOT
RACIST, PORNOGRAPHIC, OR WHICH -- IF IT ENTERED THE
INSTITUTION -- WOULD JEOPARDIZE PRISON ORDER OR SECURITY. WE SPECIFICALLY RECOMMEND DOWNLOADING INFORMATION FROM OUR EX-OFFENDER PAGE TO SEND TO INMATES WHO ARE NEARING THEIR RELEASE DATE.
COPIES
OF MATERIALS OR INFORMATION FROM THE ACTUAL DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS WEB SITE ARE PERMITTED, INCLUDING COPIES
OF POLICIES, REPORTS, ETC. WITH THE EXCEPTION
OF INMATE DATABASE INFORMATION LISTING THE INMATE'S
CRIME, DISCIPLINARY, CLASSIFICATION, PAROLE ACTION AND
OTHER CATEGORIES. Questions? Call us (480)
966-8116
|
