Supermax Prisons: What We Know, What We Do Not Know, and Where We Are Going

The Prison Journal

Volumn 88, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 23-42

  Pizarro, Jesenia M ^a   Narag, Raymund E ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

inmate rights; solitary confinement; supermax

Indexed keywords

EID: 38949099346     PISSN: 00328855     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0032885507310530     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Alarid, L.F., & Cromwell, P.F. (2002). Security housing units: Supermax prisons. In L. F. Alarid & P. F. Cromwell (eds.), Correctional perspectives: Views from academics, practitioners, and prisoners (pp. 158-159). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
2. Ambramsky, S. (2002). Hard time blues. New York: St. Martin's.
3. Angelone, R. (1999, October-November). Why “super-max” prisons work. Virginia Correctional Security Report.
4. Atherton, E. (2001). Incapacitation with a purpose. Corrections Today, 63, 100-103.
5. Austin, J., Repko, S., Harris, R., McGinnis, K., & Plant, S. (1998). Evaluation of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice administrative segregation population. Washington, DC: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
6. Briggs, C.S., Sundt, J.L., & Castellano, T.C. (2003). The effect of supermaximum security prisons on aggregate levels of institutional violence. Criminology, 41, 1341-1378.
7. Bruscino v. Carlson, 854 F. 2d 162 (7th Cir. 1988).
8. Cloyes, K.G., Lovell, D., Allen, D.G., & Rhodes, L.A. (2006). Assessment of the psychosocial impairment in a supermaximum security unit sample. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 760-781.
9. Collins, W.C. (2004). Supermax prisons and the constitution: Liability concerns in the extended control unit. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections.
10. DeMaio, J.R. (2001). If you build it, they will come: The threat of over-classification in Wisconsin's supermax prison. Wisconsin Law Review, 2001, 207-248.
11. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976).
12. Feeley, M.M., & Simon, J. (1992). The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implication. Criminology, 30, 449-474.
13. Feeley, M.M., & Rubin, E.L. (1998). Judicial policy making and the modern state. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14. Fellner, J., & Mariner, J. (1997). Cold storage: Super-maximum security confinement in Indiana. New York: Human Rights Watch.
15. Freeman v. Berge, 68 Fed. Appx. 738 (7th Cir. 2003).
16. Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17. Gonnerman, J. (1999). The supermax solution: Hopes, fears, and prison building in an upstate New York town. Village Voice. Retrieved November 3, 2001, from http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/9920/gonnerman.php
18. Haney, C. (2002). Infamous punishment: The psychological consequences of isolation. In L. F. Alarid & P. F. Cromwell (eds.), Correctional perspectives: Views from academics, practitioners, and prisoners (pp. 161-170). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
19. Haney, C. (2003). Mental health issues in long-term solitary and “supermax” confinement. Crime & Delinquency, 49, 124-156.
20. Horwitz, B. (2001). Behind bars. Consulting—Specifying Engineer, 30, 38-44.
21. Irwin, J., & Austin, J. (2001). It's about time: America's imprisonment binge. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
22. Jones ‘El v. Berge, 164 F. Supp. 1096 (W. D. Wisc. 2001).
23. King, R.D. (1999). The rise of supermax: An American solution in search of a problem? Punishment and Society, 1, 63-186.
24. King, R.D. (2005). The effects of supermax custody. In A. Liebling & S. Maruna (eds.), The effects of imprisonment (pp. 118-145). Portland, OR: Willan.
25. Korn, R. (1988). The effects of confinement in the high security unit at Lexington. Social Justice, 15, 8-20.
26. Kupers, T.A. (1996). Trauma and its squeal in male prisoners: Effects of confinement, overcrowding, and diminished services. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 66, 189-196.
27. Kurki, L., & Morris, N. (2001). The purpose, practice, and problem of supermax prisons. In N. Morris & M. Tonry (eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 28, pp. 385-424). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28. LeMaire v. Maass, 12 F. 3d 1444 (9th Cir. 1993).
29. Lynch, M. (2005). Supermax meets death row: Legal struggles around the new punitiveness in the US. In J. Pratt, D. Brown, M. Brown, S. Hallsworth, & W. Morrison (eds.), The new punitiveness: Trends, theories, perspectives (pp. 66-84). Devon, UK: Willan.
30. Lovell, D., Cloyes, K., Allen, D., & Rhodes, L. (2000). Who lives in supermax custody? A Washington State study. Federal Probation, 64, 33-38.
31. Madrid v. Gomez, 889 F. Supp. 1146 (ND. Cal. 1995).
32. Massing, M. (2001, April 22). Everybody wants one. New York Times. Retrieved December 4, 2001, from http://www.nytimes.com
33. Mears, D.P. (2005). A critical look at supermax prisons. Corrections Compendium, 30, 45-49.
34. Mears, D.P. (2006). Evaluating the effectiveness of supermax prisons. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center.
35. Mears, D.P., & Castro, J. (2006). Wardens' views on the wisdom of supermax prisons. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 398-431.
36. Mears, D.P., & Reisig, M.D. (2006). The theory and practice of supermax prisons. Punishment and Society, 8, 33-57.
37. Morris, J.H., III. (2002). It's a form of warfare: A description of Pelican Bay State Prison. In L. F. Alarid & P. F. Cromwell (eds.), Corrections perspectives: Views from academics, practitioners, and prisoners (pp. 181-183). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
38. Moussaoui defiant at sentencing. (2006, May 4). MSNBC. Retrieved December 6, 2006, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12615601
39. National Institute of Corrections. (1997). Supermax housing: A survey of current practices, special issues in corrections. Longmont, CC: Author.
40. Neal, D. (2003). Technology and the supermax prison. In D. Neal (ed.), Supermax prison: Beyond the Rock (pp. 53-66). Lanham, MD: American Correctional Association.
41. Pettigrew, G.A. (2002). Comment: Technology and the Eighth Amendment: The problem of supermax prisons. North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology, 4, 191-215.
42. Pizarro, J., & Stenius, V.M.K. (2004). Supermax prisons: Their rise, current practices, and the effect on inmates. The Prison Journal, 84, 248-264.
43. Pizarro, J., & Stenius, V.M.K., & Pratt, T.C. (2006). Supermax prisons: Myths, realities, and the politics of punishment in american society. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17, 6-21.
44. Rhodes, L. (2005). The pathological effects of supermaximum prisons. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 1692-1695.
45. Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (1981).
46. Rich v. Bruce, 129 F. 3d 336 (4th Cir. 1997).
47. Riveland, C. (1999). Supermax prisons: Overview and general considerations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections.
48. Roberts, J.V., Stalans, L.J., Indermaur, D., & Hough, M. (2003). Penal populism and public opinion: Lessons from five countries. New York: Oxford University Press.
49. Ruiz v. Johnson, 37 F. Supp. 855 (S.D. Texas 1999).
50. Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995).
51. Toch, H. (2001). The future of supermax confinement. The Prison Journal, 8, 367-388.
52. Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958).
53. Turner v. Safely, 482 U.S. 78 (1987).
54. Vitek v. Jones, 445 U.S. 480 (1980).
55. Ward, D.A., & Werlich, T.G. (2003). Alcatraz and Marion: Evaluating supermax custody. Punishment & Society, 5, 53-75.
56. Wells, T.L., Johnson, W.W., & Henningsen, R.J. (2002). Attitudes of prison wardens toward administrative segregation and supermax prisons. In L. F. Alarid & P. F. Cromwell (eds.), Correctional perspectives: Views from academics, practitioners, and prisoners (pp. 171-180). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
57. Weidman, M. (2004). The culture of judicial deference and the problem of supermax prisons. University of California Law Review, 51, 1505-1554.
58. Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312 (1986).
59. Wilkinson v. Austin, 545 U.S. 209 (2005).
60. Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294 (1991).
61. Wooldrege, J., Griffin, T.W., & Pratt, T.C. (2001). Exploring the role of hierarchical models for research on inmate behaviors: Predicting misconduct with multi-level data. Justice Quarterly, 18, 203-231.