Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

William Stovall v. New Jersey Department of Corrections

September 27, 2012

WILLIAM STOVALL, APPELLANT,
v.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT.



On appeal from the New Jersey Department of Corrections.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted May 23, 2012

Before Judges Lihotz and St. John.

William Stovall, an inmate at the New Jersey State Prison (NJSP), Trenton, appeals from the December 28, 2010 final decision of the Department of Corrections (DOC) continuing his placement in the Management Control Unit (MCU). Following our review of the arguments advanced on appeal, in light of the record and applicable law, we affirm.

I.

Stovall is serving an aggregate eighty year sentence, with a thirty-one year mandatory minimum for escape, criminal attempt, possession of implements for escape, nine assorted weapons charges, two counts of assault while armed, and three counts of robbery. Stovall also has five open detainers, two from Pennsylvania for escape and kidnapping, and three federal robbery charges.

Stovall's conduct resulted in his assignment to the MCU, which is "a close custody unit to which an inmate may be assigned if the inmate poses a substantial threat to the safety of others; of damage to or destruction of property; or of interrupting the operation of a State correctional facility."

N.J.A.C. 10A:5-1.3. The Management Control Unit Review Committee (MCURC) is responsible for hearing cases of inmates referred for placement in the MCU and for conducting three month status reviews of inmates assigned to the MCU. Ibid.

An inmate shall be assigned to the MCU when the MCURC, after considering of criteria in N.J.A.C. 10A:5-2.4, concludes that the inmate poses a substantial threat: (1) to the safety of others; (2) of damage to or destruction of property; or (3) of interrupting the operation of a State correctional facility.

[N.J.A.C. 10A:5-2.5.]

A number of criteria are considered when making this determination, including: (1) the inmate's disciplinary records; (2) past criminal offenses; (3) the number and location of past institutionalizations; (4) reports by professional staff; (5) reports indicating present involvement in criminal activity within the correctional facility; (6) evidence of an attitude indicating an unwillingness to follow rules and obey orders; (7) inability to maintain a satisfactory work record as indicated in reports by work supervisors and/or frequency of job changes; (8) information indicating unsatisfactory adjustment to or performance in treatment or rehabilitative programs; and (9) evidence of an inability or unwillingness to house with other inmates in a non-disruptive and non-destructive manner.

N.J.A.C. 10A:5-2.4.

Following an inmate's placement into the MCU, a routine review hearing "shall be made a minimum of every three months." N.J.A.C. 10A:5-2.10(a). At each routine review hearing, the MCURC shall review the information upon which the decision was based to assign the inmate to the MCU. N.J.A.C. 10A:5-2.10(e). The MCURC shall release an inmate from the MCU only when, in its opinion, "the inmate no longer poses a substantial threat: (1) [t]o the safety of others; (2) [o]f damage to or destruction of property; or (3) [o]f interrupting the secure and/or orderly operation of a State correctional facility." N.J.A.C. 10A:5-2.10(f). In ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.