Dawson v. Kendrick, Civ. A. No. 78-1076.

• Court: United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Southern District of West Virginia
• Writing for the Court: David W. Knight, Charles T. Cunningham, Princeton, W. Va., for defendants
• Citation: 527 F. Supp. 1252
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 78-1076.
• Decision Date: 10 August 1981
• Parties: Ronald DAWSON, Marlon Lee Hess, James L. Caldwell, William Burton, Garrett Norris, Charles Scott, Chris Dillard and James Martin, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Earl G. KENDRICK, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Mercer County, West Virginia; Luther H. Byrd, individually and in his official capacity as Mercer County Commissioner and as representative of all other members of the Commission; Joe Coburn, individually and in his official capacity as Mercer County Commissioner and President of the Mercer County Commission, and as representative of all other members of the Commission; Clarence H. Six, individually and in his official capacity as Mercer County Commissioner, and as representative of all other members of the Commission; Mercer County Commission; Ricky Lee Lambert, individually and in his official capacity as jailer; and Harvey D. Wilson, individually and in his official capacity as Clerk of the Mercer County Commission, Defendants.

527 F. Supp. 1252

Ronald DAWSON, Marlon Lee Hess, James L. Caldwell, William Burton, Garrett Norris, Charles Scott, Chris Dillard and James Martin, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
Earl G. KENDRICK, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Mercer County, West Virginia; Luther H. Byrd, individually and in his official capacity as Mercer County Commissioner and as representative of all other members of the Commission; Joe Coburn, individually and in his official capacity as Mercer County Commissioner and President of the Mercer County Commission, and as representative of all other members of the Commission; Clarence H. Six, individually and in his official capacity as Mercer County Commissioner, and as representative of all other members of the Commission; Mercer County Commission; Ricky Lee Lambert, individually and in his official capacity as jailer; and Harvey D. Wilson, individually and in his official capacity as Clerk of the Mercer County Commission, Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 78-1076.

United States District Court, S. D. West Virginia, Bluefield Division.

August 10, 1981.

527 F. Supp. 1253

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

527 F. Supp. 1254

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

527 F. Supp. 1255

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

527 F. Supp. 1256

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

527 F. Supp. 1257

Tobias J. Hirshman, Charleston, W. Va., for plaintiffs

David W. Knight, Charles T. Cunningham, Princeton, W. Va., for defendants.

FINDINGS OF FACT

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

OPINION AND ORDER

COPENHAVER, District Judge.

527 F. Supp. 1258
                 CONTENTS
                Introduction 1257
                 I. Findings of Fact
                 Generally 1259
                 Population and
                 Operational Costs 1261
                 Plumbing 1262
                 Lighting 1263
                 General Sanitary
                 & Health Conditions 1263
                 Deputy Sheriffs 1265
                 Fire Detection 1266
                 Sufficiency of
                 Housing & Supervision 1268
                 Classification 1270
                 Rules and Regulations 1271
                 Imposition of
                 Punishment 1271
                 Administrative
                 Segregation 1271
                 Clothing 1272
                 Toilet Articles 1272
                 Exercise 1272
                 Medical & Dental 1272
                 Nutrition 1273
                 Mail 1275
                 Telephones 1276
                 Visitation 1276
                 Reading Materials 1277
                 Rehab Programs 1277
                 Access to the
                 Courts 1279
                 Attorney/Client
                 Interview Facilities 1279
                 Possible Discrimination 1279
                 Other Conditions 1280
                 Conclusions 1280
                 II. Conclusions of Law ÔÇö
                 Generally
                 The Function of
                 Constitutional
                 Review 1280
                 Eight Amendment
                 and Fourteenth
                 Amendment 1282
                 State Statutory
                 Standards 1284
                 Totality of Conditions
                 & Discrete
                 Adjudication
                 Analyses 1285
                 Equal Protection 1286
                 III. Conclusions of Law ÔÇö
                 The Constitutionality
                 of Conditions and
                 Practices at the
                 Mercer County Jail
                 A. Plumbing 1287
                 B. Lighting 1288
                 C. Bedding, Clothing
                 & Toilet Articles 1288
                 D. Housekeeping 1289
                 E. Prisoner Safety 1289
                 F. Overcrowding 1294
                 G. Nutrition 1297
                 H. Exercise 1298
                 I. Discipline 1301
                 J. Medical Care 1306
                 K. Visitation 1308
                 L. Mail 1309
                 M. Access to the
                 Courts 1312
                 N. Segregated Confinement 1314
                 O. Rehab. & Reading
                 Materials 1315
                 P. Voting 1316
                 Q. Female Prisoners 1316
                 IV. ORDER 1318
                

Introduction

The named plaintiffs in this civil action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ž 1983 are certain past and present inmates of the Mercer County Jail located in Princeton, West Virginia. Plaintiffs have asserted extensive denials of their various constitutional rights due to the conditions they allege exist at the jail. The complaint does not focus upon an isolated condition or even

527 F. Supp. 1259

group of conditions. Rather, plaintiffs have launched a comprehensive assault upon all of the physical aspects of the jail and virtually every procedure by which the jail is operated and maintained

The court has conditionally certified this case as a class action. The class is composed of all persons who have been, presently are, or shall in the future be confined in the jail, excluding those whose claims are barred by statutes of limitation or laches. The class is subdivided into two parts with one subclass being composed of all members of the class who are pre-trial detainees and the other being all members of the class who have been confined in the jail following trial or conviction for some crime.

The trial to the court of plaintiffs' requests for both a preliminary and a permanent injunction and for declaratory relief were consolidated for hearing. Trial of the damages issues has been postponed until adjudication of the requests for injunctive and declaratory relief.

The claims against the physical aspects of the jail allege inadequate plumbing and lighting; exposure to risk of injury or death by fire due to inadequate fire escape routes; the lack of adequate facilities and programs for indoor and outdoor exercise and recreation; the lack of light, toilet facilities, and showers in the solitary confinement cells; the lack of adequate facilities in which an inmate may consult with an attorney; and, the presence of unsanitary and unhealthful conditions in the jail in general such as filth and vermin. Plaintiffs complain as well of the manner in which the jail is operated and the lack of numerous necessary services, alleging: inadequate medical, dental and nursing care; nutritionally inadequate meals; the failure to provide clothing; the failure to furnish various toilet articles and grooming aids; insufficient numbers of guards and deputy sheriffs stationed in the jail so as to endanger the health and safety of the inmates; the lack of written rules to inform the inmates of their rights and responsibilities; the failure to provide vocational, educational, or other rehabilitative programs; the lack of an adequate classification system of the inmates, leading in turn to insufficient supervision and indiscriminate housing of the inmates; inadequate handling of inmate mail and access to telephones; the failure to provide sufficient reading materials; inadequate visitation schedules and poor facilities in which the inmates may meet with their visitors; the arbitrary imposition of punishment upon inmates who are alleged to have broken the unwritten jail rules without a hearing or other protection; and the general imposition of discriminatory treatment upon the inmates by the jailkeepers. Plaintiffs also assert that their access to the courts is being impinged upon because they are denied access to their attorneys and to various legal materials, including a law library. A separate claim of some of the inmates alleges the failure of the jailkeepers to adequately provide the lesser degree of incarceration to which pre-trial detainees are said to be entitled. The issues presented conclude with additional claims premised upon the alleged failure of the jailkeepers to comply with various statutory duties which repeat the items set forth above.¹

I. Findings of Fact

Generally

In addition to the oral testimony and exhibits received during the trial and the view of the jail by the court during the course of the trial, the parties have entered

527 F. Supp. 1260

into several stipulations of fact.² The court adopts all of the stipulations of fact as its own and incorporates them in these findings by reference. The court's findings of fact, in addition to the stipulations, are set forth in the following discussion

The Mercer County Jail is operated by the Mercer County Sheriff's Department and is financed by the Mercer County Commission. The jail, which is the only primarily adult detention center operated by the county, is located within the Mercer County Courthouse in Princeton, West Virginia. The courthouse is a three-story building plus a basement. The entrance to the jail is located at the basement level. The basement houses the jail control room, the kitchen facilities, the drunk tank, and the so-called juvenile area.³ The sheriff's office proper is located on the first floor of the courthouse. The main portion of the jail is located on the entire third floor of the building. Access to the jail facilities on the third floor is by three means: an elevator which rises from the basement to the third floor; a staircase rising from the basement to the third floor with an exit to the sheriff's office on the first floor and an exit into the prosecuting attorney's office; and a small elevator which stops at the third floor and at the second floor near the criminal courtroom on that floor. The small elevator does not continue downward past the second floor.

The entire courthouse was designed in 1929 and was built in 1930-31. General maintenance of the water, toilet, and lighting facilities has been undertaken from time to time in response to prisoner abuse and the aging of the building. Although routine maintenance checks are not made by a professional firm, the deputies report maintenance needs as they arise.

The one instance of major repair and maintenance work on the courthouse took place in 1977-78 under the direction of an architect, Alex Mahood, at a total cost for the jail areas of approximately $65,000.⁴ In the main, these repairs constituted maintenance rather than remodeling and, to a significant degree, benefitted the facilities on the second floor, particularly the criminal courtroom.

The third floor of the courthouse contains the bulk of the prisoners' cells. There are four basic cell areas ÔÇö federal side, county side, city side, and trusty side ÔÇö plus three other areas known as sweat cells, side cells or women's cells, and the dungeon.

The county side consists of a dayroom measuring 12 feet by 45 feet (540 square

527 F. Supp. 1261

feet) and six cells measuring 8 feet by 12 feet (96 square feet). Each cell contains eight bunks. Of the 96 square feet in each cell, the bunks take up the majority of the floor space. The cells are all in one line and are located across from the dayroom. In between the cells and the dayroom is a guards' corridor. The dayroom's opposite side is separated from the exterior wall by another guards' corridor. Thus, the cells and dayroom are within...