Bazzetta v. McGinnis, s. 95-2181

Decision Date05 January 1998
Docket Number96-1559,Nos. 95-2181,s. 95-2181
Citation133 F.3d 382
PartiesMichelle BAZZETTA; Stacy Barker; Toni Bunton; Debra King; Shante Allen; Adrienne Bronaugh; Alesia Butler; Tamara Prude; Susan Fair; Valerie Bunton; Arturo Zavala, through his next friend Valerie Bunton, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Kenneth McGINNIS, Director of Michigan Department Of Corrections; Michigan Department of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

Deborah A. LaBelle (argued and briefed), Law Offices of Deborah LaBelle, Ann Arbor, MI; Michael Barnhart (briefed), Detroit, MI, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Kevin M. Thom (argued), Lisa C. Ward (briefed), Office of the Attorney General, Corrections Division, Lansing, MI, for Defendants-Appellees.

John P. Jacobs, O'Leary, O'Leary, Jacobs, Mattson & Perry, Southfield, MI, for Amicus Curiae Catholic Lawyers Society.

Robert A. Sedler, Wayne State University Law School, Detroit, MI, Paul J. Denenfeld, Detroit, MI, for Amicus Curiae American Civil Liberties Union Fund of Michigan.

Before: SILER, COLE, and VAN GRAAFEILAND *, Circuit Judges.

SUPPLEMENTARY OPINION

VAN GRAAFEILAND, Circuit Judge.

On September 4, 1997, this Court affirmed certain limitations on prisoner visitation imposed by the district court. See 124 F.3d 774. Because the Michigan Department of Corrections construes our opinion in a manner that was not intended, this Supplementary Opinion is written solely for the purpose of clarification.

The Department's brief on appeal contains the following clearly expressed and significantly emphasized statement:

It is important to note that the visitation restrictions at issue involve limitations on contact visitation between members of the public, including minor children, and convicted felons.

There was nothing new or novel in this definition of the issue. The Department took the same position in the district court. In its response to the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, it said:

It is important to emphasize that the challenged visitation policies at issue in this case concern limitations on contact visitation. Since contact visitation involves personal, face-to-face contact by convicted/incarcerated felons with members of the public, the sheer volume of visitations alone (2300 contact visits each day, averaging 69,000 visits each month, for about 820,000 visits annually) must be restricted for reasons of security and administrative concerns related to maintaining internal order and discipline throughout all MDOC prison facilities. There can be no dispute that 820,000 visits annually presents a very difficult penological problem for MDOC with regard to the scheduling, screening, supervision and monitoring of contact visitation.

The Department continued:

Although MDOC is mindful of the close familial relationships that exist between a father and/or mother with their children, significant security and related administrative concerns caused by the high volume of contact visitation mandate a more narrow definition of the minor children (children, stepchildren and grandchildren) that are allowed contact visitation at MDOC facilities. Given MDOC's legitimate penological interest in maintaining order and security at its prison facilities and the real dangers involved whenever children participate in contact visits, these visitor restrictions are a reasonable response to important competing interests.

The evidence submitted by the Department was addressed to the issue of contact visitation, and this too was referred to in the above-mentioned response:

As the attached affidavits of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Bazzetta v. McGinnis
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan
    • April 19, 2001
  • Austin v. Hopper
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • August 10, 1998
    ... ... Compare Bazzetta v. McGinnis, 902 F.Supp. 765, 770 (E.D.Mich.1995) (holding that no first-amendment right of ... ...
  • Blank v. Department of Corrections
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • June 20, 2000
    ... ... 222 Mich. App. at 408-409, 564 N.W.2d 130; see also Bazzetta v. McGinnis, 124 F.3d 774 (C.A.6, 1997), supplemented 133 F.3d 382 (C.A.6, 1998); Bazzetta v ... ...
  • Royer v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • March 28, 2013
    ... ... Overton v. Bazzetta, 539 U.S. 126, 132, 123 S.Ct. 2162, 156 L.Ed.2d 162 (2003) (quoting Turner, 482 U.S. at 8991, ... McGinnis, 124 F.3d 774, 779 (6th Cir.1997), supplemented 133 F.3d 382 (6th Cir.1998), and our Circuit has ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT