DOCSLIB.ORG

Oklahoma Statutes Title 57. Prisons and Reformatories

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oklahoma Statutes Title 57. Prisons and Reformatories OKLAHOMA STATUTES TITLE 57. PRISONS AND REFORMATORIES §57-1. County commissioners - Inspection of jails...............................................................................11 §57-2. Prohibition against intoxicating beverages in jails.....................................................................11 §57-3. Repealed by Laws 1978, c. 244, § 42, eff. July 1, 1978..............................................................11 §57-4. Jails to be kept clean - Care of prisoners...................................................................................11 §57-4.1. Administering medications.....................................................................................................11 §57-4.2. Restraints on pregnant inmates – Access to certain persons during delivery........................12 §57-5. Bible furnished for each prisoner - Ministers to have access....................................................14 §57-6. Courts may sentence to hard labor............................................................................................14 §57-7. Marshal shall superintend labor in towns.................................................................................14 §57-8. Repealed by Laws 1978, c. 244, § 42, eff. July 1, 1978..............................................................15 §57-9. Penalty for cruelty to prisoners.................................................................................................15 §57-10. Protection from annoyance - Penalty for annoying prisoners.................................................15 §57-11. Repealed by Laws 1978, c. 244, § 42, eff. July 1, 1978............................................................15 §57-12. Repealed by Laws 1980, c. 68, § 1, emerg. eff. April 10, 1980.................................................15 §57-13. Escape when committed for capital offenses a felony.............................................................15 §57-14. Removal of prisoners in case of fire.........................................................................................15 §57-15. When a poor convict is held for fine and costs........................................................................16 §57-16. Jails of state to receive federal prisoners.................................................................................16 §57-16a. Sheriffs to receive and hold United States prisoners.............................................................16 §57-17. United States shall be liable for expenses...............................................................................17 §57-18. Calendar of United States prisoners........................................................................................17 §57-19. Juvenile prisoners....................................................................................................................17 §57-20. Credit on fine and costs - Credit for efficient work and good behavior...................................17 §57-21. Contraband in jails or penal institutions - Penalties................................................................18 §57-22. Receiving compensation for providing goods or services for benefit of inmate – Penalties.. 19 §57-31. Corporal punishment prohibited.............................................................................................20 §57-32. Violation a misdemeanor.........................................................................................................20 §57-36. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 97, § 8, emerg. eff. April 4, 1984...................................................20 §57-37. Facilities reaching maximum capacity......................................................................................20 §57-38. Jail reimbursement rate - Reimbursement for medical expenses...........................................24 §57-38.1. Reimbursement for disciplinary incarceration under community sentencing.....................24 §57-38.2. Reimbursement for incarceration ordered as an intermediate sanction.............................25 §57-38.3. Reimbursement and payment for medical care and treatment...........................................25 §57-41. Establishment or access to jail in another county - Private prison contractors......................27 §57-42. Common jails used as prisons, when.......................................................................................27 §57-43. Repealed by Laws 1985, c. 62, § 4, eff. Nov. 1, 1985...............................................................27 §57-44. Repealed by Laws 1978, c. 244, § 42, eff. July 1, 1978............................................................27 §57-45. Repealed by Laws 1978, c. 244, § 42, eff. July 1, 1978............................................................27 §57-46. Repealed by Laws 1978, c. 244, § 42, eff. July 1, 1978............................................................27 §57-47. Sheriff to have charge of the jail..............................................................................................27 §57-48. Jail register................................................................................................................................28 §57-49. Sheriff shall furnish court with copy of register or computer record......................................28 §57-50. Repealed by Laws 1994, c. 367, § 11, emerg. eff. June 9, 1994...............................................28 §57-51. Duty of county board - Medical officer - Reports....................................................................28 §57-51.1. Persons with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) - Violation of § 1192.1 of Title 21 - Transfer to Department of Corrections for extended medical care.............................................29 §57-52. Sheriff to provide board, medical care and necessities - Compensation - Purchases.............29 §57-53. Monthly inspections................................................................................................................30 §57-54. Person authorized to act as jailer - Civilian employees - Oath - Liability - Jails operated by private prison contractors...................................................................................................................30 §57-55. Penalty for sheriff's neglect.....................................................................................................31 §57-56. Penalty for breaking jail...........................................................................................................31 §57-57. Separate rooms for different classes and sexes – Classifying prisoners - Double celling barrack-style living space - Construction contracts with private contractors.....................................31 §57-58. Employment of prisoners.........................................................................................................32 §57-58.1. Public property maintenance and jail work details..............................................................32 §57-58.2. Order of jail administrator for prisoner labor - Supply of guards.........................................33 §57-58.3. Sentence and fine or cost credits for prisoner labor.............................................................33 §57-59. Grand juries shall examine prisons..........................................................................................33 §57-60. Sheriff to be paid for keeping prisoners...................................................................................33 §57-61. Sheriff to keep copy of order of confinement.........................................................................34 §57-62. Commitments and discharges to be filed................................................................................34 §57-63. Box containing commitments and discharges to be delivered to successor...........................34 §57-64. County without prison.............................................................................................................34 §57-65. Credit for good behavior and blood donations - Duty of sheriff..............................................34 §57-66. Repealed by Laws 1986, c. 207, § 90, operative Nov. 15, 1986...............................................35 §57-67. Repealed by Laws 1986, c. 207, § 88, operative July 1, 1986..................................................35 §57-68. Jail facilities operated by private prison contractor - Application of state law........................35 §57-69. Meals for county jail and correctional facilities personnel......................................................35 §57-91. Repealed by Laws 1969, c. 137, § 2, eff. April 9, 1969.............................................................36 §57-92. Repealed by Laws 1969, c. 137, § 2, eff. April 9, 1969.............................................................36 §57-93. Repealed by Laws 1969, c. 137, § 2, eff. April 9, 1969.............................................................36 §57-94. Repealed by Laws 1969, c. 137, § 2, eff. April 9, 1969.............................................................36 §57-95. Delivery of sentenced person by sheriff or detention center - Receipts.................................36 §57-96. Foreign convicted offenders - Transfer or exchange................................................................37 §57-97. Department of Corrections Offender Transport Revolving Fund.............................................37 §57-101. Repealed by Laws 1941, p. 463, § 3.......................................................................................38
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2015 Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice Allegra M. McLeod Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1490 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2625217 62 UCLA L. Rev. 1156-1239 (2015) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Social Control, Law, Crime, and Deviance Commons Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice Allegra M. McLeod EVIEW R ABSTRACT This Article introduces to legal scholarship the first sustained discussion of prison LA LAW LA LAW C abolition and what I will call a “prison abolitionist ethic.” Prisons and punitive policing U produce tremendous brutality, violence, racial stratification, ideological rigidity, despair, and waste. Meanwhile, incarceration and prison-backed policing neither redress nor repair the very sorts of harms they are supposed to address—interpersonal violence, addiction, mental illness, and sexual abuse, among others. Yet despite persistent and increasing recognition of the deep problems that attend U.S. incarceration and prison- backed policing, criminal law scholarship has largely failed to consider how the goals of criminal law—principally deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retributive justice—might be pursued by means entirely apart from criminal law enforcement. Abandoning prison-backed punishment and punitive policing remains generally unfathomable. This Article argues that the general reluctance to engage seriously an abolitionist framework represents a failure of moral, legal, and political imagination.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for More Incarceration
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Policy and Communications Office of Policy Development The Case for More Incarceration 1992 &7 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Policy and Communications Office of Policy Development The Case for More Incarceration 1992, NCJ-J39583 139583 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the Ph~rson or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in t IS do.c~ment ~~e those of (he authors and do not necessarily rep'esent the official position or pOlicies of the National Institute of Justice. Permtisdsion to reproduce this II f) I8llM material has been gran~d t:1y • . • .l?UbllC Danain/Off. of Poliey Communications/Off. of POlley Develop. to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Ffutrthher repr?ductlon outside of the NCJRS system requires permission o e ........ owner. NCJRS ~AN 5 1993 ACQUISITIONS (@ffitt nf tltt Attnrntl1 <&tntral liIus1yingtnn, i.QT. 20530 October 28, 1992 In July, I released a report entitled Combating Violent Crime: 24 Recommendations to strengthen Criminal Justice, set­ ting forth a comprehensive strategy for making state criminal justice systems more effective in achieving their central purpose -- the protection of our citizens. As I stated then, there is no better way to reduce crime than to identify, target, and incapa­ citate those hardened criminals who commit staggering numbers of violent crimes whenever they are on the streets. Of course, we cannot incapacitate these criminals unless we build sufficient prison and jail space to house them.
    [Show full text]
  • From Slavery to Mass Incarceration
    loïc wacquant FROM SLAVERY TO MASS INCARCERATION Rethinking the ‘race question’ in the US ot one but several ‘peculiar institutions’ have success- ively operated to define, confine, and control African- NAmericans in the history of the United States. The first is chattel slavery as the pivot of the plantation economy and inceptive matrix of racial division from the colonial era to the Civil War. The second is the Jim Crow system of legally enforced discrimination and segregation from cradle to grave that anchored the predominantly agrarian society of the South from the close of Reconstruction to the Civil Rights revolution which toppled it a full century after abolition. America’s third special device for containing the descendants of slaves in the Northern industrial metropolis is the ghetto, corresponding to the conjoint urbanization and proletarianization of African-Americans from the Great Migration of 1914–30 to the 1960s, when it was ren- dered partially obsolete by the concurrent transformation of economy and state and by the mounting protest of blacks against continued caste exclusion, climaxing with the explosive urban riots chronicled in the Kerner Commission Report.1 The fourth, I contend here, is the novel institutional complex formed by the remnants of the dark ghetto and the carceral apparatus with which it has become joined by a linked relationship of structural symbiosis and functional surrogacy. This suggests that slavery and mass imprisonment are genealogically linked and that one cannot understand the latter—its new left review 13 jan feb 2002 41 timing, composition, and smooth onset as well as the quiet ignorance or acceptance of its deleterious effects on those it affects—without return- ing to the former as historic starting point and functional analogue.
    [Show full text]
  • Men, Women and Children in the Stockade: How the People, the Press, and the Elected Officials of Florida Built a Prison System Anne Haw Holt
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2005 Men, Women and Children in the Stockade: How the People, the Press, and the Elected Officials of Florida Built a Prison System Anne Haw Holt Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES Men, Women and Children in the Stockade: How the People, the Press, and the Elected Officials of Florida Built a Prison System by Anne Haw Holt A Dissertation submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2005 Copyright © 2005 Anne Haw Holt All Rights Reserved The members of the Committee approve the Dissertation of Anne Haw Holt defended September 20, 2005. ________________________________ Neil Betten Professor Directing Dissertation ________________________________ David Gussak Outside Committee Member _________________________________ Maxine Jones Committee Member _________________________________ Jonathon Grant Committee Member The office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members ii To my children, Steve, Dale, Eric and Jamie, and my husband and sweetheart, Robert J. Webb iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a million thanks to librarians—mostly the men and women who work so patiently, cheerfully and endlessly for the students in the Strozier Library at Florida State University. Other librarians offered me unstinting help and support in the State Library of Florida, the Florida Archives, the P. K. Yonge Library at the University of Florida and several other area libraries. I also thank Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Imprisonment: Where?
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. IMPRISONMENT: WHERE? -- --- - --5 DEC "1 '\918 Imprisonment: where? Institutions (prisons and remand houses) to which persons* sentenced to tenns of imprisonment may be committed There are various types of t)(ison in the Netherlands, each type being intended for a particular category of piisoner, for instance young persons or aduits, prisoners serving short-term or long-term sentenQ~S, men or women. Selection for any of these institutions takes into account: - age; - length of sentence. Another important factor is whether or not the person concerned wa~ already in custody when sentenced (i.e. on remand in a rgrnand house). Age As far as age is concerned, a distinction is drawn between adults (persons aged 23 and over} and young p1'lrsons (the 18 -23 age-group; in some cases, persons under 18 Or ;:,VGii persons of23 and 24). length of sentence When distinguishing between persons serving short-term and long-term sentences, the actual du ration of the sentence is taken into account, that is to say, the sentence imposed less any period spent in custody awaiting trial or sentence (Le. in preliminary detention). The length of sentence is important since, as already * the only establishment to which women sentenced to imprisonment are committed Is the Rotterdam Women's Prison; the information given in this pamphlet, therefore, refers only to male prisoners. 1 stated, a number of institutions are intended for prisoners serving short-term sentences and a number of others for those serving long-term sentences.
    [Show full text]
  • World War Ii Internment Camp Survivors
    WORLD WAR II INTERNMENT CAMP SURVIVORS: THE STORIES AND LIFE EXPERIENCES OF JAPANESE AMERICAN WOMEN Precious Vida Yamaguchi A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY August 2010 Committee: Radhika Gajjala, Ph.D., Advisor Sherlon Pack-Brown, Ph.D. Graduate Faculty Representative Lynda D. Dixon, Ph.D. Lousia Ha, Ph.D. Ellen Gorsevski, Ph.D. © 2010 Precious Vida Yamaguchi All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Radhika Gajjala, Advisor On February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 required all people of Japanese ancestry in America (one-eighth of Japanese blood or more), living on the west coast to be relocated into internment camps. Over 120,000 people were forced to leave their homes, businesses, and all their belongings except for one suitcase and were placed in barbed-wire internment camps patrolled by armed police. This study looks at narratives, stories, and experiences of Japanese American women who experienced the World War II internment camps through an anti-colonial theoretical framework and ethnographic methods. The use of ethnographic methods and interviews with the generation of Japanese American women who experienced part of their lives in the United State World War II internment camps explores how it affected their lives during and after World War II. The researcher of this study hopes to learn how Japanese American women reflect upon and describe their lives before, during, and after the internment camps, document the narratives of the Japanese American women who were imprisoned in the internment camps, and research how their experiences have been told to their children and grandchildren.
    [Show full text]
  • Imprisonment*
    IMPRISONMENT* Keith B. Jobson** "... let the punishment fit the crime" I. INTRODUCTION Bleak and foreboding, the penitentiary fortress, Dorchester, dominates the town that bears its name, much as imprisonment itself dominates sen- tencing. In the law books, page after page of print is devoted to impris- onment, a few scant lines to probation or fines. In the superior courts, judges pen volumes justifying the application of imprisonment, but little or no attempt is made to build a sentencing philosophy around probation or fines. In government administration, extravagant sums are spent building new and bigger prisons while little or no effort is made to measure their efficacy in protecting society from further crime. Imprisonment carries its own grim justification: punishment. Retribution in sentencing is not dead. The Criminal Code was con- ceived in retribution, ' and, beneath the rhetoric of deterrence and rehabilita- tion, the courts maintain retributive sentencing practices. ' While retributive goals suffered minor setbacks at the hands of penal administrators converted to utilitarian reform, the basic retributive philosophy remains intact and still runs strong throughout the legal system; indeed, in 1969. a research report by The Foundation for Legal Research in Canada, funded by the Canadian Bar Association, affirmed in clear language that without punishment, first and foremost, the raison d'etre of imprisonment falls. ' This article examines the impact of sentences of imprisonment in magis- trates' courts in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and questions the pur- poses of imprisonment. It is suggested that in sentencing retribution be *This article was written in partial fulfillment of the requirements for degree of Doctor of the Science of Law in the Faculty of Law, Columbia University.
    [Show full text]
  • A Prisoner Story: the Third Turkey
    A PRISONER STORY: THE THIRD TURKEY G. David Curry: Professor Emeritus, University Of Missouri-St. Louis, USA Many men on their release carry their prison about with them into the air, and hide it as a secret disgrace in their hearts, and at length, like poor poisoned things, creep into some hole and die. It is wretched that they should have to do so, and it is wrong, terribly wrong, of society that it should force them to do so. Oscar Wilde, 2011, De Profundis Kindle Edition, Golgotha Press. Locations 175-177. A Bus Ride The night was one of those nights when I wasn’t sure if I slept at all. I was excited. Something was going to change, but I didn’t know exactly what or how. The only person whom I was able to reach by phone on the day that I found out that I was going to be moved was my friend Jane. Prison phone calls are like that. There is no leaving of messages. There is no making two calls without stressing potentially fatal line etiquette. I could only hope that Jane, whose own husband was incarcerated would be able to reach my ever stalwartly protective attorney Arthur Madden. I was a pro bono case for Arthur, but that was not a qualification affecting his actions on my behalf. As I hopelessly tried to sleep, I distinctly remember the shadow of prison bars on the top bunk a few feet away. The shadow of the bars were a stark reminder that I was caged in what e.e.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Stress and the Effects of Working in a High Security Prison Joseph Micieli
    1 Stress and the Effects of Working in a High Security Prison Joseph Micieli 2 Abstract This study examines the stress and effects thereof on the correctional officer and worker in some of America’s high security prisons. As we all know, prison is a community of violence subjugated behind the walls of various correctional institutions around the country. Through manipulation and violence, criminal offenders try to make their stay in many of America’s High Security prisons more congenial. With a blatant disregard for the correctional worker and correctional officer, the violence, confrontation and belligerence exerted by the inmate population ultimately affects the daily work and personal lives of these dedicated and basically unknown law enforcement professionals, known as correctional officers and workers. The following research design will examine the effects that working in this dangerous subculture has on the correctional worker and officer, their personal and professional lives. 3 INTRODUCTION The correctional environment is one plagued with confrontation, violence and diseases. According to Aziz, Levine, Sieber, Schulte, & Steenland’s, (1997) study of New York state Correctional officers who were exposed to Tuberculosis “… Approximately 33% of new cases in 1992 among New York State Prison employees were due to occupational exposure”(pg.2013). The prison subculture is one of distrust and broken rules. This subculture is a street like mentality subjugated to the particular prison gang or affiliation that an inmate might belong to when incarcerated. Prison life is mainly looked at through the eyes of the prisoner or the violence that this forgotten portion of the American population goes through once subjected to the rigors of these violent and dangerous subcultures.
    [Show full text]
  • The Label of Life Imprisonment in Australia: a Principled Or Populist Approach to an Ultimate Sentence
    2012 The Label of Life Imprisonment in Australia 747 THE LABEL OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT IN AUSTRALIA: A PRINCIPLED OR POPULIST APPROACH TO AN ULTIMATE SENTENCE JOHN L ANDERSON I INTRODUCTION The sentence of life imprisonment in modern penal systems is the ‘most severe sanction at the disposal of the State’ in jurisdictions where the death penalty has been abolished.1 It has singular significance as an ultimate penalty but its practical application and operation is an enduring enigma. Life imprisonment is ‘still seen in many jurisdictions as the natural and lesser alternative to the death penalty’.2 As a result the ‘life sentence’ has endured for many years in various countries, including Australia, without being closely scrutinised as to its practical operation and alignment with the purposes and principles of sentencing. The label of life imprisonment has become a contentious contemporary international sentencing issue with a significant profile in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights3 and European countries generally4 as well as in the United States.5 It has not had a high profile in Australian jurisprudence or scholarship. This article aims to raise that profile by evaluating the use of life imprisonment for the crime of murder in Australia and whether this use reflects a principled or populist approach to this ultimate form of punishment. Between the Australian jurisdictions there are significant variations in the form and practical implementation of sentences labelled as ‘life imprisonment’ Associate Professor, Newcastle Law School, Faculty of Business and Law, University of Newcastle, Australia. A much earlier version of this article was presented as a paper in the opening plenary session at the National Judicial College of Australia & ANU College of Law Sentencing Conference 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Clemency Sought by Convict
    75¢ COLBY Thursday June 26, 2014 Volume 125, Number 100 Serving Thomas County since 1888 8 pages FFREEREE PPRESSRESS Clemency sought by convict By Sam Dieter shot Harkins, who had been a vice Colby Free Press president of Sunflower Bank, in [email protected] her home in Colby on March 31, 1997. A Colby man convicted for His story during the ensuing murdering his fiancee in the 1990s trial was centered around money. applied for executive clemency, The two got into an argument in an act which could get him out which Harkins criticized Pabst’s of jail or result in a shorter prison latest job opportunity, he said, Courtesy of LaDonna Regier sentence. and made him feel worthless. So Dr. LaDonna Regier showed pictures of people “hawking” (above), or selling produce by the roadside produce near a village This is the last day the public he gave his fiancée a .44 caliber in Ghana last Thursday while talking about her mission trip there. Nurses in the clinic talked with a mother (below) about her can comment on the case of Tod revolver, telling her to shoot him child. Regier’s security guard Baba posed for a shot (bottom right) with the new generator installed at the clinic where she Alan Pabst, who shot his fiancée if he was so worthless. But in- worked. Regier herself was shown in a pictures (bottom left), making a traditional dish out of cassava and plantains. Phoebe Harkins in 1997, and ap- vestigators gathered ballistic evi- plied for clemency this month. dence contradicted this claim at The public had until 15 days after the scene, where Harkins was shot the notice of his application was twice.
    [Show full text]
  • 21.5 Right to Appear in Civilian Clothes A
    Ch. 21: Personal Rights of Defendant (Jan. 2018) 21.5 Right to Appear in Civilian Clothes A. Basis of Right B. Preservation of Issue for Appeal _____________________________________________________________ 21.5 Right to Appear in Civilian Clothes A. Basis of Right Federal constitution. Trial of a defendant in prison garb has been recognized as an affront to the dignity of the proceedings and as jeopardizing a defendant’s due process right to a fair trial; thus, the State may not compel a defendant to appear for trial before a jury in identifiable prison or jail clothing. The constant reminder of a defendant’s condition implicit in prison attire may affect a juror’s judgment and thereby endanger the presumption of innocence by creating an unacceptable risk that the jury will impermissibly consider that circumstance in rendering its verdict. Unlike the need to impose physical restraints on unruly defendants, “compelling an accused to wear jail clothing furthers no essential state policy.” Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501, 505 (1976). The U.S. Supreme Court in Estelle also recognized that defendants who are compelled to stand trial in prison garb are usually “only those who cannot post bail prior to trial” and to “impose the condition on one category of defendant, over objection, would be repugnant to the concept of equal justice embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment.” Id. at 505–06. Whether a defendant was prejudiced by being compelled to stand trial while wearing prison attire is subject to harmless error analysis on appeal. The State has the burden of showing that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
    [Show full text]