<html>
  <head>

    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div id="container" class="container font-size5">
      <div style="display: block;" id="reader-header" class="header"> <b><small><small><small><a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/State-court-rules-prisoners-can-t-be-punished-7305577.php"
                  id="reader-domain" class="domain"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/State-court-rules-prisoners-can-t-be-punished-7305577.php">http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/State-court-rules-prisoners-can-t-be-punished-7305577.php</a></a></small></small></small></b>
        <h1 id="reader-title">State court rules prisoners can’t be
          punished for hunger strike</h1>
        <div id="reader-credits" class="credits">By Bob Egelko</div>
      </div>
      <div class="content">
        <div style="display: block;" id="moz-reader-content">
          <div
xml:base="http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/State-court-rules-prisoners-can-t-be-punished-7305577.php"
            id="readability-page-1" class="page">
            <div class="article-title">
              <h5 title="2016-04-23T13:53:28Z" class="timestamp">April
                23, 2016 </h5>
            </div>
            <div class="article-body">
              <p>A state appeals court says a California prisoner who
                took part in a mass hunger strike protesting long-term
                solitary confinement should not have been punished for
                disorderly behavior because he did not disrupt prison
                operations or endanger anyone.</p>
              <p>Although the 2013 hunger strike, which involved as many
                as 30,000 inmates across the state, may have affected
                the workload of prison staff members, there was no
                evidence of “a breakdown of order” or any threat of
                violence, the First District Court of Appeal in San
                Francisco said in the case of a former inmate at <a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22Pelican+Bay+State+Prison%22">Pelican
                  Bay State Prison</a>.</p>
              <p>The ruling, issued last month, was published Friday as
                a precedent for future cases. In addition to overturning
                a 90-day sentencing increase for the inmate, the
                decision could help numerous hunger strikers whose
                prison conduct is scrutinized by parole boards, said an
                attorney in the case, Carol Strickman of <a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22Legal+Services+for+Prisoners%22">Legal
                  Services for Prisoners</a> with Children.</p>
              <p>For inmates serving life sentences with the possibility
                of parole, “the parole board is citing the hunger strike
                as a reason to keep them in prison, because of their
                ongoing criminal mentality,” Strickman said.</p>
              <p>“We hope to use this opinion to try to educate the
                parole board,” she added. “You might say it makes you
                more suitable (for release), engaging in nonviolent
                protest. People could see it as good citizenship.”</p>
              <p>The inmate, <a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22Jorge+Gomez%22">Jorge
                  Gomez</a>, was sent to Pelican Bay, in Del Norte
                County, in 2000 and was transferred three years later to
                the prison’s Security Housing Unit, where he was kept in
                solitary confinement for more than a decade. In July
                2013, he refused to eat for four days and, after the
                third day, was cited for a “serious” violation of prison
                rules for taking part in a hunger strike.</p>
              <p>Other inmates continued the hunger strike for as long
                as two months. Prison officials attributed the protest
                to gangs looking to expand their influence, but
                supporters of the inmates said the action helped to
                pressure the state into a legal settlement last August
                that put new limits on the use of solitary confinement
                and has already returned nearly 1,000 inmates to the
                general prison population.</p>
              <p>In Gomez’s case, a prison hearing officer found that he
                had willfully disrupted prison operations by requiring
                officers to delay performing their normal duties and
                penalized him by taking away 90 days of good-conduct
                credits, effectively lengthening his sentence.
                Transferred later to another prison, he appealed
                unsuccessfully in the prison system and filed a lawsuit
                in 2014 that a judge summarily dismissed.</p>
              <p>But the appeals court said prison officials failed to
                show that Gomez had engaged in disorderly or disruptive
                conduct, the regulation he was punished for violating.
                The court said it could clear him without having to
                decide whether inmates have a constitutional right,
                under freedom of speech, to engage in hunger strikes.</p>
              <p>Gomez did not act violently or threaten violence, and
                none of the effects reported by prison officials —
                delays in some operations and services and reassignment
                of guards to monitor the hunger strikers — “suggests
                prison operations were thrown into disorder,” <a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22Justice+Therese+Stewart%22">Justice
                  Therese Stewart</a> wrote in the 3-0 decision.</p>
              <p>There was no immediate comment from prison officials,
                who could appeal the ruling to the state <a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22Supreme+Court%22">Supreme
                  Court</a>.</p>
              <p><a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22L.+Richard+Braucher%22">L.
                  Richard Braucher</a>, a lawyer for Gomez, described
                the inmate’s conduct as “heroic.”</p>
              <p>“These inmates were protesting their own mistreatment,
                peacefully, and then they were punished for it
                unlawfully,” Braucher said.</p>
              <em>
                <p>Bob Egelko is a <a
href="http://www.sfgate.com/search/?action=search&channel=news&inlineLink=1&searchindex=gsa&query=%22San+Francisco+Chronicle%22">San
                    Francisco Chronicle</a> staff writer. Email: <a
                    title="begelko@sfchronicle.com"
                    href="mailto:begelko@sfchronicle.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:begelko@sfchronicle.com">begelko@sfchronicle.com</a></a>
                  Twitter: @egelko</p>
              </em></div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div> </div>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
      Freedom Archives
      522 Valencia Street
      San Francisco, CA 94110
      415 863.9977
      <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.freedomarchives.org">www.freedomarchives.org</a>
    </div>
  </body>
</html>