COVID-19 Cases in Federal Prisons Rise Slightly, DOJ Fumbles Vaccine Rollout
by Derek Gilna
Despite its over-hyped (and useless) January, 2020 "Action Plan," for dealing with the corona virus, the federal prison system, continuing its long history of bureaucratic fumbling, is still a hotbed of COVID-19 cases. (Rochester: 433 inmates and 59 staff total Covid positive; Schuylkill, 50+, with CDC help imminent because of continued problems; Bryan, 50+; Aliceville, 50+; Coleman women, over 50, with 2 deaths, and an outbreak of legionnaires' disease also; Tallhassee women, 50+; Carswell, 25+, with severe shortage of medical staff to treat emergencies.) There are also widespread concerns about vulnerability to repeat infection and the prisons' inability to deal with that problem.
District courts, although many have slowed to a crawl as a result of lockdowns and a deluge of prisoner filings, continue to grant Compassionate Releases. People who have recovered have also received relief. Many judges clearly do not trust the prison system to address the continuing problem.
Unfortunately for vulnerable prisoners, the vaccine rollout has also had serious issues. DOJ, and its dysfunctional stepchild, the federal prison system, have a problem with transparency. DOJ websites claim that almost 50,000 doses have already been administered, but that number, even if accurate, is misleading. he doses given to prisoners are generally those rejected by Prison staff numbers, who number almost 40,000. This means that at most 10,000 single doses have found their way to prisoners. Many staff have refused the vaccines, meaning that they are still potential spreaders of the virus. There has also been little concern as to whether it is appropriate to give to people who have already been ill, or are allergic to vaccines. If you are neither, TAKE IT, as I will next week.
It might be helpful to take note of these suggestions for preserving your medical circumstances for future litigation: 1. Retain all medical records, receipts, and labels off medication and prescriptions, and send copies to outside contacts.2. Keep a diary of all interactions with prison medical staff and outside medical providers, and send copies to outside contacts.3. Send emails to all prison medical personnel documenting your current medical condition, treatment (or lack of it), how you feel, and what treatment that you requested, and what you didn't get.4. Send copies of all of this to your outside people.
I am also beginning to see examples of deliberate misstatement (or omission of key facts) in prison medical records, especially where prison medical personnel feel that they might be targeted by a lawsuit for poor treatment. Aggressively seek your medical records, and scan them for inaccuracies, and memorialize those inaccuracies in emails to staff.
On the legislative front, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the lead sponsors of the landmark First Step Act, introduced the bipartisan, bicameral Prohibiting Punishment of Acquitted Conduct Act of 2021. This legislation would end the unjust practice of judges increasing sentences based on conduct for which a defendant has been acquitted by a jury
“Under our Constitution, defendants can only
be convicted of a crime if a jury of their peers finds they are guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt. However, federal law inexplicably allows judges to
override a jury verdict of ‘not guilty’ by sentencing defendants for acquitted
conduct. This practice is inconsistent with the Constitution’s guarantees
of due process and the right to a jury trial,” Durbin said. “Our
bipartisan, bicameral bill would make it clear that this unjust practice is prohibited
under federal law.”
Did a Sixth
Circuit panel largely decimate the federal sentencing fraud guidelines (and
perhaps many others)? See the Sixth Circuit's panel decision on Wednesday
in US v. Riccardi, No. 19-4232 (6th Cir.
Also, it should be noted that the fraud guideline is not the only one important part of the federal sentencing guideline with an intricate set of commentary instructions that might be challenged as full of "improper expansions." Perhaps this theory might find its way to the US Supreme Court before too long.
You are never alone. Be not afraid, and let not your heart be troubled.
113 McHenry #173,
