Document: 461 U.S. 238 103 S.Ct. 1741 75 L.Ed.2d 813 Antone OLIM, et al., Petitionersv.Delbert Kaahanui WAKINEKONA. No. 81-1581. Argued Jan. 19, 1983. Decided April 26, Syllabus Petitioner members of a prison "Program Committee," after investigating breakdown in discipline and the failure certain programs within maximum control unit Hawaii State Prison outside Honolulu, singled out respondent another inmate as troublemakers. After hearing—respondent having been notified thereof retained counsel to represent him—the same Committee recommended that respondent's classification security risk be continued he transferred on mainland. administrator accepted Committee's recommendation, was California state prison. Respondent then filed suit against petitioners Federal District Court, alleging had denied procedural due process because his transfer consisted persons who initiated hearing, contrary regulation, biased him. The Court dismissed complaint, holding regulations governing transfers did not create substantive liberty interest protected by Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. Appeals reversed. Held: 1. An interstate does deprive an any itself. Just has no justifiable expectation will incarcerated particular so implicate directly when intrastate is made, Meachum v. Fano, 427 215, 96 2532, 49 451; Montanye Haymes, 236, 2543, 466, State. Statutes agreements recognize that, from time time, it necessary inmates prisons other States. Confinement normal limits or range custody which conviction authorized transferring impose. Even when, here, involves long distances ocean crossing, confinement remains constitutional limits. Pp. 244-248. 2. Nor do Hawaii's constitutionally interest. Although creates placing limitations official discretion, place administrator's discretion inmate. For matter, prescribe standards guide Program whose task advise administrator. Thus significance attaches fact require kind hearing before can exercise unfettered discretion. 248-251. 664 F.2d 708 (CA9 1981), Michael A. Lilly, Hawaii, for petitioners. Robert Gilbert Johnston, Chicago, Ill., respondent. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion Court. 1 issue this case whether prisoner one implicates meaning 2 * Delbert Wakinekona serving sentence life imprisonment without possibility parole result murder court. He also sentences various crimes, including rape, robbery, escape. At classified placed unit. 3 Olim Prison. constituted Committee." On August 2, 1976, held hearings determine reasons prison's Inmates appeared at these hearings. 5, received notice Committee, 10, would review correctional program system should changed facility mainland institution. 4 10 conducted presided over following explanation Committee: 5 "The reviewed your entire file, testimony arguments counsel, concluded Maximum. You are still considered view escapes subsequent convictions serious felonies. noted progress you made vocational training expressed desire continue endeavor. However relationship with staff, reported threaten intimidate them, raises grave concerns regarding potential further disruptive violent behavior. Since there Maximum offer cannot remain [the unit] impending construction new facility, recommends institution mainland." App. 7-8. 6 Olim, administrator, few days later Folsom California. B 7 Rule IV Supplementary Rules Regulations Corrections Division, Department Social Services Housing, approved June recites concerned punishment. Rather, intended promote best interests inmate, State, community.1 Paragraph requires prior involving "a grievous loss inmate," defines "generally" reasonable man." 21.2 under ¶ Rule, required establish "an impartial Committee" conduct such "composed least three were actively involved . brought 20. Under 3, must give written permit him, stated exceptions, confront cross-examine witnesses, afford him opportunity heard, apprise findings. 21-24.3 8 directed make recommendation decides what action take: 9 "[The administrator] may, final decisionmaker: "(a) Affirm reverse, whole part, recommendation; 11 "(b) hold abeyance believes jeopardizes safety, security, welfare ., institution, community refer matter back study recommendation." IV, 3d(3), 24. 12 contain See Lono Ariyoshi, 63 Haw. 138, 144-145, 621 P.2d 976, 980-981 (1981). C 13 42 U.S.C. § 1983 officials caused transfer. alleged being specific violation United States Clause. 459 F.Supp. 473 (1978).4 14 Ninth Circuit, divided vote, It created promulgating IV. In doing, court declined follow cases Courts procedures mandated See, e.g., Cofone Manson, 594 934 (CA2 1979); Lombardo Meachum, 548 (CA1 1977). reasoned gives prisoners they absent committee, concerning facts pre-hearing notice.5 Because Appeals' decision conflict among circuits, presents question itself protects transfers, we granted certiorari. 456 1005, 102 2294, 73 1299 (1982). II 15 451 (1976), 466 Massachusetts medium Commonwealth. Montanye, companion case, New York punishment breach rules. This rejected "the notion visited upon person sufficient invoke protections Clause." U.S., 224, S.Ct., 2538 (emphasis original). went state: 16 initial assign convict subject audit Clause, although degree may quite different another. sufficiently extinguished defendant's empower confine its prisons. 17 "Neither, our view, protect duly convicted system. State's institutions impose." Id., 224-225, 18 observed retain residuum liberty, see Wolff McDonnell, 418 539, 555-556, 94 2963, 2974-75, 41 935 (1974), "any substantial deprivation imposed authorities triggers judicial wide spectrum discretionary actions traditionally have business administrators rather than federal courts." 225, 19 Applying principles Vitek Jones, 445 480, 100 1254, 552 (1980), mental hospital Placement "not conditions subjects individual," about "consequences qualitatively characteristically suffered crime." 493, 1264. argues true mainland, therefore controls. 20 We agree. State.6 Often, inmate's home possible. A crime usually serve Overcrowding need separate necessitate transfers. number reasons, lack facilities capable providing appropriate all offenders. 21 level, 5003(a) authorizes Attorney General contract prison, Howe Smith, 452 473, 101 2468, 69 171 (1981).7 Title 4002 (1976 ed. Supp. V) permits placement up years. Neither statute sentenced. 22 many statutes Haw.Rev.Stat. 353-18 Alaska Stat.Ann. 33.30.100 compacts between States, implemented statutes, authorize incarceration Cal.Penal Code Ann. 11189 (West 1982) (codifying Interstate Compact); 11190 Western Conn.Gen.Stat. 18-102 (1981) England 18-106 355-1 (1976) Idaho 20-701 (1979) Ky.Rev.Stat. 196.610 (1982) (same). And anticipate sometimes 23 short, neither unreasonable nor unusual practically sentenced, out-of-state portion unlike "within 2538.8 difference shorter distance degree, kind,9 instructs determining factor nature weight." 2538. reasoning compels conclusion transfer, California, III 24 however, "conferred right initially assigned, defeasible only proof acts misconduct," 226, 2539, "ha[d] represented [would] occur occurrence events," id., 228, 2540. "discretion prisoner] whatever reason all," ibid., found Similarly, law "impose[d] power transfer," 243, 2547, basis invoking 25 These demonstrate show "that particularized criteria decisionmakers." Connecticut Board Pardons Dumschat, 458, 467, 2460, 2465, 158 (BRENNAN, J., concurring). If decisionmaker "required base decisions objective defined criteria," but instead "can deny requested relief permissible 466-467, 2465 (opinion Court); 488-491, 1261-62 (summarizing cases). 26 thus entitled protection As makes clear, Supreme (1981), completely unfettered. No govern restrict determination. decide introductory paragraph n. 1, supra, places purely advisory Committee.10 27 erred attributing discretion.11 Seventh Circuit recently Shango Jurich, 681 1091, 1100-1101 (1982), "[a] course individual; demand needless formality."12 end Its purpose individual legitimate claim entitlement. generally Simon, Liberty Property Court: Defense Roth Perry, 71 Calif.L.Rev. 146, 186 (1983). "for 2540, protect. choose rights, course,13 making choice independent right. Hewitt Helms, --- ----, 864, 871, 74 675 (1983) (slip op. 10). 28 sum, directly, interest.14 Accordingly, judgment 29 Reversed. 30 MARSHALL, whom BRENNAN joins, STEVENS joins Part I, dissenting. 31 my implicated I respectfully dissent. 32 limited chooses bestow retains significant law. 2974, wholly stripped imprisoned crime. There iron curtain drawn Constitution country. [P]risoners deprived life, property law." 33 change prisoner's interest, relevant constitutes "grievous loss" trigger process. 488, 1261, (1980). Morrissey Brewer, 408 471, 481, 92 2593, 2600, 484 (1972), quoting Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee McGrath, 341 123, 168, 624, 646, 95 L.Ed. 817 (1951) (Frankfurter, answer depends part comparison treatment customary, habitual population whole." 879 (STEVENS, dissenting). principle established Vitek, qualitative 34 little doubt represents confinement. addition incarcerated, ordinary consequence criminal sentence, effect banished home, historically "among severest."1 indeterminate period possibly rest nearly 4,000 miles family friends. practical entirely cut off contacts world, just if prohibited visits outsiders. Surely isolation far more drastic normally accompanies imprisonment. 35 agree compel Wakinekona's Ante, 248. Both located convicted, expressly phrased holdings terms transfers.2 rested premise 2538; 2547. premise, likewise assume removed residence raise questions. None indicated immune scrutiny 36 Actual experience simply bear Court's assumptions routine unusual" "to sentenced." 247. less percent jurisdictions 1979, nationwide jurisdictions.3 Moreover, vast majority 250 their homes.4 Measured norms, "qualitatively 37 will, place, reason, ever implicating 38 majority's "created"5 laws, rules, regulations, practices. laws impose limit supra; Greenholtz Nebraska Penal Inmates, 442 99 2100, 60 668 (1979); Wright Enomoto, 462 397 (ND Cal.1976), summarily aff'd, 434 1052, 98 1223, 55 756 (1978). By contrast, "imposes [prison officials'] power," act accords "unfettered discretion," 39 misapplies concluding leave inmates. 249-250. establishes scheme subsequently reclassified standard classifying "optimum Division" light "best individual, community."6 inmates, consider punitive aims. factors where situated," "his history, changing needs, resources available Divisions, inmates/wards, exigencies community, factors." Section detailed set applicable reclassification lead loss," phrase contained itself.7 rules cast mandatory language, cover matters notice, access information, confrontation cross-examination, faculty 40 those decided earlier Term. contended administrative provided could "upon assessment situation control," "where determined threat disturbance others," hearing.8 construed phrases " 'the control,' disturbance,' "substantive predicates" restricted 871. restrictions, combination safeguards, "deman[ded] interest." distinguishable meaningful respect provisions Helms. requirements are, anything, elaborate couched "language unmistakably character." extent imposes restricting Helms statutory control" limitation custody. states ensure placement" accordance considerations include needs [and] Division," ordering transfers.9 suggests even unlimited recommendations classifications rise state-created "completely ante, 249. disagree. IV(3)(d)(3) provides forwarded provision authorizing arbitrary reasons,11 mere defeat protectible otherwise take optimum placement. regulation left open Superintendent decide, all, confined custody.12 nevertheless necessarily rejects solely manner process.13 43 foregoing states: "An determines situated Division. Rather isolated aspects (as adjustment process), dynamic considers factors. never inflicts punishment; contrary, imposition stricter community. continuing evaluation each given Division." Petitioners concede, purposes argument," Tr. Oral Arg. 9, 25. V legal "potential transfer." violated statutes. dismissal claims, pendent jurisdiction state-law claims. F.Supp., 476. Several months handed down decision, 976 petition rehearing present Circuit's attention decision. F.2d, 714. Appeals, court's interpretation own; merely reached "federal question." adhered resolution case. 714-715. Indeed, read stating rule stated: "In Fano Haymes infringe 489, 1261 added). describing eschewed narrow reading now proposes. 869, (1983); Moody Daggett, 429 78, 88, 97 274, 279 50 236 (1976). invoked Anthony Wilkinson, 637 1130 (CA7 1980), vacated remanded sub nom. Mederios, 453 902, 3135, 989 courts almost uniformly entitlement Beshaw Fenton, 635 239, 246-247 (CA3 cert. denied, 912, 3145, 995 (1981); 934, 937, Sisbarro Warden, 592 (CA1), 444 849, 99, 62 64 Fletcher 467 777, 779-780 (Kan.1979); Curry-Bey Jackson, 422 926, 931-933 (DC 1976); McDonnell General, 420 217, 220 (ED Ill.1976); Goodnow Perrin, 120 N.H. 669, 671, 421 A.2d 1008, 1010 (1980); Girouard Hogan, 135 Vt. 448, 449-450, 378 105, 106-107 (1977); re Young, Wash.2d 216, 227-228, 622 373, 379 cf. Fajeriak McGinnis, 493 468 1974) (pre-Meachum States); Hillen Director Services, 455 510 (CA9), 409 989, 93 331, 256 (1972) California). But Wash., 233, P.2d, 382 (concurring opinion); ex rel. Olson Maxwell, 259 N.W.2d 1977); Tai Thompson, 387 912 (Haw.1975) transfer). Respondent's argument unpersuasive. took note hardships separation family, friends, hostile environment, difficulty contact interruption educational rehabilitative programs. 241, 4, 2546, 4. faces attempts analogize banishment English sense "beyond seas," arguing surely justified sentence. banished; conviction, freely inhabit takes fortuitous confined, additional element Vt., A.2d, 105. exiled; essence, restates shown text, conviction. Alaska, contiguous 48 empowers penal unless confining impermissible. 242, 2547; 244, 2548 (dissenting Cruz Beto, 405 319, 1079, 263 (1972); 470. (1983), decisionmakers' To dissent doubts truly unfettered, post, 258, 11, ability authority construe itself, interpreted entitling pre-transfer 520 374, 379-380 1975), Other receiving not, more, Jiles, 658 194, 200 923, 1282, 465 (1982); Bills Henderson, 631 1287, 1298-1299 (CA6 1980); Pugliese Nelson, 617 916, 924-925 938 13, 14-16 Adams Wainwright, 512 948, 953 Fla.1981); Haw., 980-981. assert enable gather information thereby intelligently, therapeutic purpose: participation decisionmaking process, hoped, reduces tension 52-53. conclusion, bias composition becomes irrelevant. J. Madison, Elliott's Debates, 455. Whether called banishment, exile, deportation, relegation transportation, compelling quit city, country, specified life," unique severe deprivation, specifically outlawed "[t]he twelfth section Habeas Corpus Act, Car. II, great muniments liberty." Ju Toy, 198 253, 270, 644, 649, 1040 (1905) (Brewer, convicting defendant, "empowere[d] prisons," (latter emphasis added), "transfer system" 2538, "[c]onfinement Ibid. 2547 ("We infringed State.") Justice, T. Flanagan, Sourcebook Criminal Statistics—1981, Table 6.27, pp. 478-479. figures reflect "all already force," "[d]oes release [the] relinquish jurisdiction." 580. Profile Inmates: Sociodemographic Findings 1974 Survey Correctional Facilities, p. (1979). Over 70% homes. 880, dissenting) (Prison "provide evidentiary support affects constitutionally-protected liberty," "do (Emphasis original)). Regulation provides: inmate's/ward's While term explicitly defined, treat rights IV(3). readily inferred IV(3), involve loss, V, circumstances, ---- 6, 871 6. language policy statement, "inmates segregated medical, psychiatric, disciplinary, reasons," 403, reasons. 1293 449 1093, 891, 66 822 Winsett McGinnes, 996, 1007 1980) (en banc). "(3) recommendation. (a) (b) inmate/ward, futher order since disallows That provided: "All Review shall sustaining amending reversing favor inmate." Pennsylvania Bureau Correction Administrative Directive BC-ADM 801, VI(C). Brief Respondent, 12a, O.T. 1982, 81-638. continues "appropriate," 18a, "decisionmaker," implicitly grant "protectible entitlement," 12, 2106, though statute, listed Parole "[a]ny board relevant." 18, 2109. relies, 249, eliminated action, inconsistent both Greenholtz.

Category: 3