Associated Press
IOWA CITY — Iowa prison officials unfairly lengthened an offender’s sentence by excessively punishing him for assault, a case that highlights systemic problems with inmate disciplinary hearings, a state watchdog agency said Monday after a years-long review.
In a report called “Neither fair, nor impartial,” the Office of Ombudsman concludes that Department of Corrections officials violated policies and inmate Randy Linderman’s rights when they disciplined him for bumping a guard in 2008. The ombudsman said the case underscored questionable procedures used in dozens of hearings daily in which inmates can have sentences extended and lose privileges for rules violations.
The report determined that a prison judge ordered Linderman into 180 days of isolation and took away 180 days of earned time — a harsher punishment than allowed under department policy — after being privately pressured by the warden. Department officials gave “dubious and contradictory answers” in seeking to justify the punishment during the ombudsman’s investigation, including the judge’s unusual claim that Linderman’s chest was considered a weapon during the assault.
The ombudsman, who investigates complaints against state and local agencies, said the department should discourage employees from privately discussing pending cases with the administrative law judges who decide sanctions. Such communications are barred in other agencies that have independent judges to avoid perceptions of bias — but are legal and common inside the Department of Corrections.
As long as those communications continue, prison judges “are not truly independent, as state and federal laws require,” the report said. “As a result, DOC inmates’ legal right to fair disciplinary hearings has been and continues to be compromised.”
Judges work inside prisons and report to department general counsel Michael Savala, who told investigators he didn’t believe such discussions influence the fairness of hearings.
The report is expected to attract the attention of lawmakers and could help inmates suing the state with excessive-discipline claims.
But it is unlikely to help 49-year-old Linderman, who completed his sentence in September on theft and assault charges. Department officials rejected the report’s recommendations to expunge his discipline and make changes that include notifying inmates of the severity of charges before hearings.
“I hope the report does some good, but the reality is, it won’t,” said Linderman, of Charles City. “If you’ve got a judge staffed in that prison, he gets close with everybody.”
In their written response, corrections officials defended their actions and complained that employees felt harassed and personally attacked by investigators. The department has recently made disciplinary policies harder on inmates by eliminating a requirement that judges consider mitigating factors and stiffening sanctions for some offenses.
“Our professional staff were performing their duties in ensuring the safety, security and tranquility of the prison and simply cannot let go unaddressed the actions of inmate Linderman forcibly assaulting our staff,” now-retired DOC Director John Baldwin wrote last month.
The now-retired judge, Deborah Edwards, complained that the investigation was unfairly imposing “on my much-deserved retirement.”
Ombudsman Ruth Cooperrider said she hoped administrators would ultimately reconsider the recommendations despite their initial resistance.
Linderman had argued with a Fort Dodge Correctional Facility officer in April 2008, bumping him with his chest two or three times. The officer wasn’t injured.
Edwards didn’t consider claims by three inmates that Linderman was provoked by the officer calling him a liar, a potential mitigating factor, the report found.
The ombudsman learned in 2008 that 180 days in lost earned time was 90 more than policy allowed for a “class B” assault. Edwards then revised her decision to say Linderman committed a “class A” assault, even though that requires the use of a weapon or bodily fluid. She later told investigators that Linderman’s chest was the weapon. Meanwhile, inmates who injured guards with kicks and punches received lesser sanctions.
Investigators found an email in which Warden Cornell Smith asked Edwards before Linderman’s hearing to impose at least 180 days in disciplinary detention.
Prison officials rejected the ombudsman’s request to interview Edwards about how that affected her decision, sparking a legal fight between the agencies. The Iowa Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that the ombudsman showed strong evidence of improper conduct and could question Edwards.