2
0
K. Jamel Walker is serving a life sentence in the custody of the California Department of Corrections, in Calipatria State Prison.
In April 1994, Walker was assigned to be a clerk in the Facility A Law Library. Walker asserts that he is not and never has been a gang member.
At issue here are the lockdown procedures that followed three separate incidents in 1995.
Unlike the inmate-on-inmate violence that occurred in 1994, these instances involved inmate attacks on staff.
On May 5, 1995, five black prisoners attacked staff members in Facility A; eight staff were injured as a result. All five assailants were members of the East Coast Crips, a predominantly black gang.
The second incident took place on June 18, 1995, in Facility B. Three black inmates attacked staff members in front of the dining room, as a result of which three staff were injured. The entire prison, including Facility A, was put on lockdown. Two of the assailants were East Coast Crips and the third a member of another black gang, the Rolling 40’s Crips.
On June 19, Warden Prunty ordered that all black inmates’ central files be reviewed in order to identify members and affiliates of the East Coast Crips, and additionally ordered that the prison be searched for weapons. Black workers could be authorized for eligibility for the critical-workers list only after central file review.
The third incident also took place in Facility B. On October 31, 1995, a group of black inmates – Walker alleges they were gang members – stabbed a staff member. The prison was once again placed on lockdown, and black inmates were excluded from the critical-workers list until prison officials completed their investigation.
In attempting to break the common-sense connection here, Walker first points out that, while prison-gang affiliation is often based on race, this does not mean that all members of a race will be affiliated with a gang predominantly comprised of members of that race. In other words, being black does not necessarily mean you are a member of a black gang.
Thus, Walker concludes, making all blacks ineligible for critical-worker status was not a rational response to the May 5, June 18 and October 31 incidents, the first two of which were found to be gang-related and the last of which Walker asserts was also gang-related. Walker’s press on the issue of whether the violent incidents were gang-or race-based gains him little ground.
Garcia’s declaration indicates that the gang deemed primarily responsible for the May 5 and June 18 incidents, the East Coast Crips, is largely comprised of blacks. Walker does not dispute this. Moreover, we have recognized the common-sense link between gangs and racial violence in the prison context.
Thus, it follows that prison authorities investigating gang-related violence and attempting to restore safety and order might rationally take race into account in implementing lockdown procedures.
A staff member was assaulted on May 4 by an African-American inmate and on May 5, 1995, five African-American inmates attacked staff members in the Facility “A” program office with inmate-manufactured weapons. Four staff members received multiple stab wounds and four others sustained injuries. Pending an investigation, Warden Prunty suspended all activities except family visits, ordered a search of the prison for weapons, and allowed only critical workers who were not African-American to report to their jobs. The investigation revealed that the May 5 attack was instigated by the East Coast Crips, an African-American prison gang.
Walker argues that a triable issue exists because of evidence that the incidents were gang-related and not racially-motivated. The fact remains, however, that the East Coast Crips were an African-American gang, and African-Americans were involved in the violent incidents. It was not irrational (though it may have been unnecessary) to keep all African-American, as well as all other inmates who had non-critical jobs, locked-down until everything – including gang membership or association – got sorted out. Inmates involved in the incidents had used inmate-manufactured weapons, and common sense suggests that such weapons could be exchanged in common areas such as the law library.
Jamel Walker, Plaintiff-appellant, v. James H. Gomez; Kingston W. Prunty; R.r. Rath, Correctional Sergeant, Defendants-appellees, 370 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2004). US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit – 370 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2004). Argued and Submitted July 8, 2003. Filed June 7, 2004
Average Rating