The plaintiff had no liberty interest in remaining on work release. His situation was not comparable to parole, since he lived in a prison facility (sufficient in itself to defeat the claim), needed permission or a pass every time he left that facility, could have overnight furloughs only by permission, etc. There was no state-created liberty interest because being returned to prison is not atypical and significant under Sandin and the governing statutes and regulations allow official discretion. (Actually, in a different climate, they might have been found to create a liberty interest--"sufficient reason" is not too different from "good cause.")
The plaintiff's claim for loss of property is dismissed because of the existence of state tort remedies. See: Asquith v. Volunteers of America, 1 F.Supp.2d 405 (D.N.J. 1998).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Asquith v. Volunteers of America
|Cite||1 F.Supp.2d 405 (D.N.J. 1998)|