Handyman

San Francisco slammed for denying inmates entry to daylight

A federal judge ordered at least 15 minutes of daily access to direct sunlight for prisoners incarcerated longer than one year.

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — A federal judge ruled that the city of San Francisco violated the Fourteenth Amendment rights of prisoners at County Jail 3 in San Bruno by denying them access to direct sunlight.

Based on the physical harm suffered by plaintiffs and the lack of reasoning from the defendant for the denial of sunlight access, U.S. Magistrate Judge Sally Kim ruled that plaintiffs prevailed on their claim that complete denial of exposure to direct sunlight is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and Article I, Section 7 of the California Constitution.

“Given the need for daily access to direct sunlight, the fact that plaintiffs began suffering from medical problems approximately a year after they were incarcerated, and the failure to identify the amount of time for daily exposure, the court rules that defendant must offer to each inmate who has been incarcerated for longer than a year the following: daily access to direct sunlight, weather permitting and in the absence of an emergency (including but not limited to a global pandemic or prison riot) for at least 15 minutes,” Kim wrote. “The amount of time — 15 minutes — is more than de minimis but less intrusive on the sefendant.”

Plaintiffs are inmates that sought to represent the class of prisoners housed at San Bruno and the now-defunct San Francisco Hall of Justice.

They claim they were kept in strict solitary confinement in tiny cells and were not given sufficient room to exercise, a problem that worsened during the Covid-19 pandemic. Jose Poot, an inmate at San Bruno, testified at a bench trial in August that he estimated he has only received 20-30 seconds of exposure to sunlight per year since he was incarcerated in 2016. The prison has no outdoor exercise yard.

Poot and other inmates who testified at the bench trial in August said that the lack of access to sunlight and exercise led to health and psychological problems, including weight gain, depression, diabetes, and nearsightedness.

Montrail Brackens, a detainee at San Bruno since 2012, testified at the bench trial that his cell was so small that if he stretched out his hands he could touch both sides of the cell. He said he gained 60 pounds since his incarceration, and now has blood pressure issues and diabetes that he did not have before he was imprisoned.

Kim found the city was “recklessly indifferent” when it deprived prisoners of access to direct sunlight, writing that there was “no valid governmental interest” in denying direct sunlight to inmates.

“Defendant attempts to justify its denial of outdoor exercise by arguing, with no evidence, that there is no way that defendant can securely provide exercise to plaintiffs and other inmates because there is no outdoor exercise yard,” Kim wrote.

Kim wrote there was nothing stopping the defendants from constructing an outdoor exercise yard and noted that other facilities in the area, such as San Quentin State Prison, have outdoor exercise yards.

“Defendant relies upon tautological reasoning: it created the problem by building a jail without a secured outdoor exercise yard and then relies upon that problem to claim that it cannot provide a secure way for inmates to have access to direct sunlight.”

Kim noted that the California Board of State and Community Corrections sets minimum standards for the physical structure in which detainees can be housed. The standards call for an outdoor exercise yard in every Type II facility in the state. The American Correctional Association also recommends one hour of daily access to an outdoor recreation yard for all inmates.

Kim did rule, however, that there was no violation when the city confined prisoners during the Covid-19 pandemic.

“Defendant’s actions in confining inmates to their cells for long periods of time, though, were balanced against the threat of death caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. ‘Genuine emergency’ can serve as a rational basis for complete lockdown and deprivation of right to exercise,” Kim wrote.

Read the Top 8

Sign up for the Top 8, a roundup of the day’s top stories delivered directly to your inbox Monday through Friday.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button