In 1984, prisoners of Cellblock 6 who were confined to administrative segregation of the Arizona State Prison filed suit under 42 USC 1983 against the prison and its employees. The plaintiffs were represented by the ACLU National Prison Project and private counsel.
There is no docket available for the case, and it is unclear when the original complaint was filed. The first amended complaint, filed March 8, 1984, focused on administrative segregation procedures and conditions. Plaintiffs alleged many problems with the disciplinary program, including arbitrary assignment of levels, penalties that were degrading and dehumanizing, denial of access to courts, denial of freedom to exercise religious beliefs, and lack of procedural due process. The second amended complaint, filed on May 7, 1984, added a number of general allegations about the totality of conditions in the prison. The ACLU National Prison Project came on the case as counsel for the plaintiffs at this time.
Class certification was granted on May 25, 1984 to include all prisoners classified to Administrative Segregation at the Arizona State Prison.
A stipulated partial settlement agreement was submitted to the District Court of Arizona (Judge Carl A. Muecke) for review and approval on October 26, 1984. In it, the parties agreed to the appointment of Allen Breed as monitor to observe and report to the court on the progress of compliance with the partial settlement. The court heard oral testimony and evidence between February and April of 1985, and a Stipulated Settlement Agreement was filed May 8, 1985. On May 16, 1985, a notice to the class of the proposed partial settlement was filed, and plaintiff inmates filed two sets of objections to it.
Judge Muecke approved the agreement on June 17,1985, noting its provision for an independent monitor to observe the implementation and operation of the policies and practices set forth in the agreement. The court also set deadlines for the resolution of the issues of fees and costs.
The settlement agreement was in three parts. The first part provided for structural and operational agreements governing the execution of the settlement agreement. The second part set out the principles governing the operation and conditions of the administrative segregation unit. The third part of the agreement set forth the present policies and procedures of the Arizona Department of Corrections, including policies on: use of force; use of chemical agents; regulations on mail, telephone, and visitation; safety and emergency procedures; food services, sanitation and hygiene; and administrative segregation. The agreement mandated that these policies be consistent with the first and second parts of the settlement agreement.
Defendants moved to dismiss the case on December 2, 1987. Judge Muecke found that the Monitor's Fourth Report and the Addendum Thereto provided certification that the defendants were in full compliance with the requirements of the agreement, and the case was dismissed on February 4, 1988.Theresa Spaulding - 06/04/2005