| Alaska Supreme Court Opinions made Available byTouch N' Go Systems and Bright Solutions |
|
|
|
This site is possible because of the following site sponsors. Please support them with your business.
|
| Alaska Supreme Court Opinions made Available byTouch N' Go Systems and Bright Solutions |
|
|
|
|
|
This site is possible because of the following site sponsors. Please support them with your business.
|
You can search the entire site. or go to the recent opinions, or the chronological or subject indices. Cleary v. Smith (11/10/2006) sp-6068
Notice: This opinion is subject to correction before
publication in the Pacific Reporter. Readers are
requested to bring errors to the attention of the Clerk
of the Appellate Courts, 303 K Street, Anchorage,
Alaska 99501, phone (907) 264-0608, fax (907) 264-0878,
e-mail corrections@appellate.courts.state.ak.us.
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
| MICHAEL CLEARY, DEMETRY | ) |
| KENEZUROFF, HARRY MORGAN, | ) Supreme Court No. S-11646 |
| BOB OWEN, THOMAS WALTER, | ) |
| and ERNEST MORGAN, on behalf of | ) |
| themselves and all other persons who | ) Superior Court No. |
| are now or will be similarly situated, | ) 3AN- 81-5274 Civil |
| ) | |
| Appellants, | ) |
| ) | |
| v. | ) |
| ) | |
| ROBERT SMITH, Commissioner, | ) |
| Department of Health and Social Services; | ) |
| ROGER ENDELL, Director, Division of | ) O P I N I O N |
| Adult Corrections, Department of Health | ) |
| and Social Services; VERNON CAULKINS, | ) |
| Assistant Director, Division of Adult | ) |
| Corrections, Department of Health and Social | ) |
| Services; REVEREND WILLIAM LYONS, | ) |
| BEVERLY DUNHAM, FREDERICK | ) |
| PETTYJOHN, AL WIDMARK, and | ) |
| CONRAD MILLER, all of the Alaska Parole | ) |
| Board; SAMUEL TRIVETTE, Executive | ) |
| Director of the Alaska Board of Parole, and | ) |
| their subordinates, employees and agents, | ) |
| ) | |
| Appellees. | ) No. 6068 - November 9, 2006 |
| ) | |
Appeal from the Superior Court of the State
of Alaska, Third Judicial District,
Anchorage, John Suddock, Judge.
Appearances: Donald F. Stumpf, pro se,
Seward. John K. Bodick, Assistant Attorney
General, Anchorage, David W. M rquez,
Attorney General, Juneau, for Appellees.
Before: Bryner, Chief Justice, Matthews,
Eastaugh, and Carpeneti, Justices. [Fabe,
Justice, not participating.]
PER CURIAM
In 1981 a group of adult prisoners confined in
correctional institutions owned or operated by the State of
Alaska or the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP) filed a class-
action lawsuit challenging prison conditions under the Alaska and
United States Constitutions. The class was eventually divided
into three subclasses. Subclass C consisted of all Alaska
prisoners who are now or who will be confined in institutions
which are owned or operated by the FBOP. Subclass C prisoners
alleged that their confinement in FBOP institutions was
unconstitutional because FBOP conditions were unequal to
conditions in institutions operated by the State of Alaska. In
1983 the superior court approved a settlement agreement with
respect to subclass C.
Donald Stumpf is a prisoner currently residing in the
Spring Creek Correctional Facility in Seward. The State does not
contest that Stumpf was a member of subclass C. In April 2004
Stumpf received notice of his classification for transfer to a
private detention center in Arizona. Stumpf filed a motion for a
preliminary injunction, arguing that the subclass C settlement
agreement prevented the State from transferring him. The
superior court denied Stumpfs motion and Stumpf appeals.
The superior courts conclusions resolve the contentions
now made by the parties on appeal to this court. We agree with
the courts interpretation of the settlement agreement and set it
out in relevant part at this point.1
Plaintiffs, who were members of Subclass C,
consisting of the former internees of the
federal prison system outside Alaska, argue
they have a property interest in confinement
in Alaska, by virtue of their 1983 settlement
agreement, which reads in relevant part at
A(1), (4):
(1) Defendants will
return all Alaska
prisoners housed in the
FBOP, who request
transfer to the State of
Alaska to serve the
balance of their
sentence, no later than
December 31, 1987, on the
condition that defendants
receive appropriations
sufficient for the
construction of a
correctional facility
within the State of
Alaska capable of housing
approximately 300
inmates.
. . . .
(4) Once such
funding is obtained and
as soon as possible after
the correctional facility
is constructed, but in no
event later than December
31, 1987, Alaska
prisoners presently
confined in . . . FBOP
prisons, shall be housed
in correctional
facilities within the
State of Alaska . . . .
It is anticipated that
only the rare or unique
case will require
classification to an
institution operated by
the FBOP after
1987 . . . .
. . . .
As a matter of contract interpretation,
the quoted language does not create a
contract right in the returning inmates to
incarceration in Alaska under all
circumstances. The reference to serving the
balance of sentences in Alaska is merely
descriptive of the request that triggered
transfer. It cannot reasonably be construed
to afford returnees from outside federal
prisons rights, superior to all other Alaskan
prisoners, to completion of sentences within
Alaska.
Read as a whole, the Subclass C
Agreement responded to a particular evil, the
placement of Alaskan prisoners in a federal
prison system, that was deemed by all
concerned to be inappropriate. Once Subclass
C prisoners returned to Alaska, their only
remaining right under the agreement was to
avoid future reclassification to FBOP
institutions. Otherwise, they merged into
the general Alaska prison population, and
their rights must be determined under the
[Final Settlement Agreement], just as all
other Alaskan prisoners. The Subclass C
settlement agreement cannot reasonably be
read to grant them rights greater than others
in the Alaska prison system. More
particularly, they do not have a right as
former FBOP internees to avoid classification
to an out-of-state prison occupied by
hundreds of other Alaskan prisoners, which is
not an FBOP institution.
Superior Court Judge Douglas J. Serdahelys 1986 order
also reached the conclusion that the Settlement Agreement
pertaining to Subclass C cannot fairly be interpreted . . . to
apply to that category of Alaska prisoners . . . transported to
[non-FBOP] prison facilities. Five years ago we indicated that
we agree with the reasoning of the 1986 order which declined to
read the subclass C settlement agreement as having broad
application to out-of-state facilities other than those operated
by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.2 Today we confirm that
interpretation and conclude that the subclass C settlement
agreement does not apply to the transfer of subclass C prisoners
to non-FBOP facilities.
We AFFIRM the superior courts denial of Stumpfs motion.
In the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska
Michael Cleary, et al., )
) Supreme Court No. S-11646
Appellants, )
v. ) Order
)
Robert Smith, et al., )
)
Appellees. ) Date of
Order: 11/9/06
)
Trial Court Case # 3AN-81-05274CI
Before: Bryner, Chief Justice, Matthews, Eastaugh, and
Carpeneti, Justices. [Fabe, Justice, not participating.]
On consideration of the Motion for Publication filed
10/10/06,
It is Ordered:
1. The Motion for Publication is Granted.
2. Memorandum Opinion and Judgment No. 1262, issued on
October 4, 2006, is withdrawn and Opinion No. 6068 is
issued in its place.
Entered at the direction of the court.
Clerk of the Appellate Courts
Marilyn May
cc: Supreme Court Justices
Judge Suddock
Trial Court Appeals Clerk
Publishers
Distribution:
John K Bodick
AGO Criminal Division
310 K Street Suite 403
Anchorage AK 99501
Donald Stumpf
Spring Creek Correctional
Center
P.O. Box 5001
Seward AK 99664-5001
_______________________________
1 The quoted portion of the superior court opinion has
been edited to conform with the formal standards of this court.
2 Smith v. Cleary, 24 P.3d 1245, 1249 n.13 (Alaska 2001).
 |
| Case Law Statutes, Regs & Rules Constitutions Miscellaneous |
|
