Filed Date: March 22, 1983
Clearinghouse coding complete
Under the impetus of federal litigation in Newman v. Alabama, on March 22, 1983, Alabama Commissioner of Corrections Freddie Smith instituted the Supervised Intensive Restitution (SIR) Program in the Alabama prison system. Under the program, which was created under Code of Alabama (1975) §14-8-61, the Alabama prisons released hundreds of inmates back into the general population, often several years before their sentences were completed. The prisoners were supervised and required to work, but after three months of release, the supervision decreased.
Alabama Attorney General Charles Graddick filed this lawsuit against the Commissioner of Corrections in the Circuit Court for Montgomery Alabama. He asked the court to permanently enjoin the Commissioner from releasing any more prisoners under the SIR program and to declare that the program exceeded the authority of the Department of Corrections to implement.
The case was heard by state Judge Joseph Phelps, who upheld Graddick's claim and enjoined operation of the program. At this point, the Newman plaintiffs sought the federal court's intervention. In that case, on November 4, 1983, Judge Varner held Attorney General Graddick in contempt, ordering the AG to pay $1 per prisoner per day for each prisoner held in crowded conditions. The Court also ordered Commissioner Smith to continue implementing the SIR program, and the following month found him, too, in contempt, for failing to make adequate progress in solving crowding. But on appeal, both contempt sanctions were vacated by the 11th Circuit. Newman v. Graddick, 740 F.2d 1513 (11th Cir. 1984). This led to the final settlement and dismissal of the Newman litigation, and the case is now closed.
Summary Authors
Kristen Sagar (6/19/2007)
Newman v. Alabama, Middle District of Alabama (1972)
Agricola, Algert Swanson Jr. (Alabama)
Graddick, Charles A. (Alabama)
Dreiband, Eric S. (District of Columbia)
Franklin, Louis V. (Alabama)
Moore, Richard W. (Alabama)
Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 3:30 p.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Alabama
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: March 22, 1983
Case Ongoing: No reason to think so
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
State of Alabama
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Alabama Department of Corrections, State
Case Details
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Unknown
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General:
Type of Facility: