Opinion ID: 901628
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Taking of Money

Text: [¶ 9.] The only record evidence indicating why Inmates' money was taken is a letter from Weber to Muetze in answer to Muetze's request for an administrative remedy on this issue. The letter indicated that the SDSP took the money for the Inmates' cost of incarceration. The pleadings suggest it was taken while the Inmates were working at Private Sector Prison Industries. The Inmates' briefs and the circuit court's opinion do not provide further clarification. [¶ 10.] SDCL 24-2-28 provides that: Each inmate under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections is liable for the cost of the inmate's confinement. . . . Furthermore, the Department is authorized by statute to take these costs from inmate accounts: Each inmate is liable for court-ordered fines, costs, fees, sanctions, and restitution and any obligation incurred while under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections. . . . Disbursement shall be made from an inmate's institutional account to defray the inmate's obligation, regardless of the source of the inmate's funds, including moneys in the inmate's institutional account . . . and wages earned by the inmate. . . .  [7] SDCL 24-2-29. Therefore, even if there were no administrative rules formally adopted under SDCL ch 1-26, the Administrators had statutory authorization for the diversion of the Inmates' money. Consequently, we conclude that the Administrators' diversion of money from the Inmates' accounts was not unlawful, and the circuit court properly dismissed. [8]