This was a case brought by the Justice Department against Tupelo City, Mississippi regarding the conditions at the Tupelo City Jail. Defendants included the City of Tupelo, the Mayor of Tupelo, the Chief of Police of Tupelo, and members of the Tupelo City Counsel, represented by Guy Mitchell III, ...
read more >
This was a case brought by the Justice Department against Tupelo City, Mississippi regarding the conditions at the Tupelo City Jail. Defendants included the City of Tupelo, the Mayor of Tupelo, the Chief of Police of Tupelo, and members of the Tupelo City Counsel, represented by Guy Mitchell III, the Tupelo City Attorney.
The case was brought pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act. An investigation was opened in May of 1993 focusing on allegations concerning security and safety, conditions of confinement, structural deficiencies, staffing, medical services, and fire safety. The Justice Department issued a findings letter on November 17, 1993 based on its investigation. The main problems noted were: inadequate security, supervision, medical and mental health services; environmental health and safety deficiencies; and lack of opportunity for inmates to exercise or gain access to legal materials.
Based on correspondence, it appears that a complaint was filed concurrently with a consent decree on November 14, 1994. The docket begins with the filing of the complaint on this date. The District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi, (Judge Glen H. Davidson) approved the consent decree several months later, on March 7, 1995. The consent decree provided for the construction of a new jail, drafting of a staff manual delineating general policies and procedures, renovations, increased staffing and training, improvements in medical care and mental health services, and increased access to outdoor exercise, legal materials, and visitation. The consent decree specified that quarterly compliance reports be submitted to the United States and the Court.
According to the docket, eight compliance reports were filed between May 1995 and September 1999, and on September 18, 2003, the United States moved to dismiss the case. On December 30, 2003, the court granted the Motion to Dismiss, dismissed the consent order, vacated the injunction, and terminated jurisdiction over the case.Theresa Spaulding - 06/04/2005