Note to clients headed to confinement.
Initially a new prisoner goes through a period of isolation, indoctrination, and evaluation when first arriving at the confinement facility.
Here's something you should know.
Second, the appellant claims the government violated his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent by allowing Captain Simmerto see his medical record, which included non-responsive statements to psychologists. Finally, he asserts the government violated his psychotherapistpatient privilege.[A]ppellant claims his right to remain silent was violated when Captain Simmer was allowed to consider the appellant’s lack of response to psychologists’ questions in Fort Leavenworth in formulating his opinion.
The military judge found that the appellant’s behavioral health records from Fort Leavenworth were not protected by MIL. R. EVID. 513. He found that the appellant waived any privilege when he signed the “Limits of Confidentiality of Directorate of Treatment Programs Information” form. This form specifically states, “[i]nformation disclosed by patients to Army Medical Department health personnel is not privileged communication.” In the “examples” section, paragraph four, it states, “[i]f you are involved in any legal action/proceedings, your records may be subject to subpoena." At the bottom of this form is the appellant’s signature, dated 29 January 2013.
Howell involved a person in pretrial confinement. But I think the same result could happen if you appeal your case and there is a retrial.
The initial phase of confinement in isolation is to make sure the person is not a suicide risk and does not evidence a danger to other prisoners or good order and discipline. There is a medical examination. There is education on the rules the prisoner has to follow while confined. After that the prisoner meets with counselors to determine a plan of work, living, and "treatment" while confined. There are also psychological evaluations which can impact on what programs the counselor recommends or requires the prisoner complete while confined.
Make sure you have the phone number and address of people you want to be able to telephone, write to, or have visit. That information has to be provided before anyone, other than your lawyer, will be allowed contact with you from outside the facility.
The USDB is the U.S. military's only maximum-security facility that houses male service members convicted at court-martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Only enlisted prisoners with sentences over ten years, commissioned officers, and prisoners convicted of offenses related to national security are confined to the USDB. Enlisted prisoners with sentences under ten years are confined in smaller facilities, such as the nearby Midwest Joint Regional Correctional Facility or the Naval Consolidated Brig at Chesapeake, Virginia. Corrections personnel at the facility are Army Corrections Specialists (MOS 31E) trained at the U.S. Army Military Police school located at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, as well as Marine and Air Force corrections personnel.
Female prisoners from all branches of the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) are typically incarcerated in the Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar instead of the USDB.
The state-of-the-art, 515-bed, disciplinary barrack, which cost $67.8 million ($92 million in 2018 dollars), became operational in September 2002. It was built about a mile north of the original USDB at Fort Leavenworth. The 51 acres (210,000 m2) site is enclosed by two separate 14-foot (4.3 m) high fences. There are three housing units, each of which can accommodate up to 142 prisoners. The units, described as "pods", are two-tiered triangular shaped domiciles. The cells in the new facility have solid doors and a window. There are no bars. The new facility is said to be much quieter than the old one and is preferred by inmates. Colonel Colleen L. McGuire, the first female commandant of the USDB, said in 2002 that the new facility is "much more efficient in design and layout – much brighter and lighter." We should add that it's environmentally safer. Here is a typical case.
Lovett's declarations assert that he was exposed to the following conditions during his confinement at the old USDB:
1. a cell that was only four feet wide, twelve feet long, and seven and one-half feet high;2. inadequate ventilation during periods of extreme temperatures;3. falling pieces of walls and ceilings that would strike Lovett;4. vermin in the dining facility;5. sewage backed up in the serving and eating areas of the dining facility during heavy rains;6. lead-based paint on the walls and ceilings of Lovett's cell;7. asbestos coating on the pipes in the dry cleaning facility where Lovett worked;8. dry cleaning solvent leaking from the machines in the dry cleaning facility creating a risk of electrocution and exposure to fumes from the solvent;9. extended periods of lock-down, through no fault on Lovett's part, during which he was not permitted to exercise or shower;10. meals served during these lock-downs included stale foods and milk that was beyond its expiration date; and,11. high iron and lead content from the faucet providing the [**12] only drinking water available in the cell.
United States v. Lovett, 63 M.J. 211, 214-15 (C.A.A.F. 2006)