On February 8, 2013, I presented on the Contested Cases and the Michigan Department of Corrections. These are my resources:

1. A copy of my PowerPoint presentation.P&C Power Point

Section I - Introduction:

1. New Appellate Court Rules;

2. Appellate Practice Section Webinar on Court Rule Changes;

3. MDOC Policy on Administrative Rules, Policy Directives, and Operating Procedures.

Section II - Visitation and Misconduct:

A. Visitation

1. Michigan Department of Corrections Visitor Application (CAJ -103);

2. Visitation Rules;

3. Visitation Policy Directives;

4. Overton v Bazetta. US Supreme Court ruling upholding MDOC visitation policy;

B. Misconduct

1. Wolff v McDonnell. US Supreme Court decision on prisoner disciplinary hearings;

2. Michigan Statutes concerning Prisoner Misconduct Hearings;

3. Prisoner Disciplinary Policy Directives;

4. Hearings Division Statute;

5. Martin v Stine (minor misconducts not appealable);

6. Lakin v MDOC (former majors not classified as Level II cannot be appealed).

7. Lawrence v MDOC (partially overruled by statutory changes) (APA judicial review applies to prisoner misconduct tickets)

Section III - Parole

1. MDOC Summary of the Parole Process

2. Greenholtz v Nebraska Penal Complex. A discussion of when there is a due process right in the parole process;

3. Sweeton v Brown. Sixth Circuit’s discussion of Michigan’s parole process finding that there is no due process right to a parole;

4 In re Parole of Elias - standard of review on prosecution parole appeals;

5. Haeger v Parole Board

6. Macomb County Prosecutor v Osantowski (read it in conjunction with overruled Court of Appeals ruling below).

7. Morales v Department of Corrections. Cannot appeal a flop under the RJA;

8. Jackson v Jamrung. Not an equal protection violation to allow prosecution/victim appeals, but not prisoner ones

9. Navigating Through the Appeal of a Parole Decision (SADO)

10. Franciosi v Parole Board (counsel at parole hearings)

Section IV - Parole Violation:

1. Jones v Department of Corrections (violation of the forty-five day rule is not grounds for dismissal);

2. Hinton v Parole Board (availability to MDOC);

3. Morrissey v Brewer (due process in parole violation);

4. Director’s Office Memorandum 2013-28 - Detroit Reentry Centersado newsletter

5. Vance v Ananich (Flint Ombudsman and Subpoenas)

6. Text of MCR 7.123

7. Kenney v Parole Board, Michigan Supreme Court No. 145116. Pending Michigan Supreme Court case concerning the applicability of the state writ of habeas corpus.

Dated But Helpful Resources:

1. MDOC in Nut Shell: A Summary of Department of Corrections Procedures (2005);

2. MDOC in Nutshell: Our 2005 Page Handout. (Warning: large download); and,

3. Parole Violation Monograph - Prison & Corrections Section (2007).

Materials Cited by Other Speakers:

1. Million Dollar Murray. Referenced by Kent County Sheriff;

2. Kent County Correctional Facility in Jail Services;

3. Michigan Partners in Crisis;

4. American Friends Services (Ann Arbor);

5. Michigan Corrections Officer’s Association; and,

6. American Correctional Association Health Care Standards