The Newsletter of North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services, Inc.

NCPLS

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

ACCESS

THE INNOCENCE INQUIRY COMMISSION
In North Carolina,
recent exonerations
of Darryl Hunt, Alan
Gell, Lesly Jean,
Terrence Garner,
Ronald Cotton,
Charles Munsey, and
others, caused diminished public confidence in the justice
system. As a result,
in November 2002,
N.C. Chief Justice I.
Beverly Lake convened key leaders in
the criminal justice
system to discuss the
troubling issue of
wrongful convictions
of innocent people.
As an outgrowth of that initiative,
the Chief Justice created the North
Carolina Actual Innocence Commission, which came into existence
on February 14, 2003.
The purpose and mission of the
Actual Innocence Commission was
to provide a forum for the identification and discussion of common
problems in the criminal justice
system that result in conviction of
the innocent, and to develop and
recommend procedures to eliminate
or reduce wrongful convictions.
Ultimately, the Actual Innocence
Commission recommended the
creation of a body that would have
legal authority to review convictions involving claims of actual
innocence.

ted and that the
guilty continue to be
convicted;
• To ensure an
effective criminal
justice system such
that courts, prosecutors and the public
can rely on the accuracy and finality of
convictions; and
• To address victims’ concerns,
encompassing the
need for closure
based upon confidence that the right
person was convicted.

Innocence Inquiry Commission
On August 14, 2006, Governor
Easley signed legislation that made
North Carolina the first state in the
nation to create an independent
commission to examine innocence
claims of persons convicted of
felonies. The Innocence Inquiry
Commission (“Commission”) is an
experimental project designed to
accomplish several purposes:
• To protect the innocent, providing relief as quickly as possible to
those wrongly convicted by providing alternative access to justice;
• To enhance public confidence in
the justice system by helping to
ensure that the innocent are acquit-

(Continued on Page 3)
In this Issue:

The Innocence Inquiry Commission

1

Worthy of Note: Client PostConviction Victories

2

Report Regarding Contract
Legal Work

2

DOC Educational Programs a
Success

4

American Bar Association’s Criminal
Justice Section
5
Prison Art
Institute of Medicine Releases
Prisoner Research Study
Prison Legal News Founder Visits
NCPLS
-Advertisement - Prison Legal News

6
8
10
10

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 2

WORTHY OF NOTE:
CLIENT POST-CONVICTION VICTORIES

ACCESS is a publication of North
Carolina Prisoner Legal Services,
Inc. Established in 1978, NCPLS is a
non-profit, public service organization.
The program is governed by a Board
of Directors who are designated by
various organizations and institutions,
including the North Carolina Bar
Association, the North Carolina
Association of Black Lawyers, the
North Carolina Association of Women
Attorneys, and law school deans at
UNC, Duke, NCCU, Wake Forest and
Campbell.

NCPLS advocates often succeed
in correcting sentencing errors and
obtaining jail credit for our clients.
These are not cases which ordinarily make headline news, but the
following is a sampling of the successful efforts of one NCPLS Staff
Attorney, Sarah Blair, during this
quarter:

NCPLS serves a population of more
than 37,000 prisoners and 14,000 pretrial detainees, providing information
and advice concerning legal rights and
responsibilities, discouraging frivolous
litigation, working toward administrative resolutions of legitimate problems,
and providing representation in all
State and federal courts to ensure
humane conditions of confinement and
to challenge illegal convictions and
sentences.

Discussions with the Assistant
District Attorney (ADA) and a
follow-up letter resulted in the correction of a sentence from 21-35
months, to 21-26 months. As a
result, our client was released from
prison. Similarly, difficult negotiations with an ADA resulted in a
one-month sentence reduction for
another client.

Board of Directors
President Fred Williams, Esq.
Jim Blackburn
James A. Crouch, Esq.
Dean Ronald Steven Douglas
Professor Grady Jessup
Barry Nakell, Esq.
Susan Olive, Esq.
Gary Presnell, Esq.
Professor Ronald F. Wright
Executive Director
Michael S. Hamden, Esq.
Editor
Patricia Sanders, CLA

PLEASE NOTE: ACCESS is published

four (4) times a year.

Articles, ideas and suggestions are
welcome: tsanders@ncpls.org

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

sentence resulted in a reduction
form 80-105 months to 70-93
months for our client.
In addition to her case work, Ms.
Blair serves as co-chair of the N.C.
Academy of Trial Lawyers Forensic Task Force. This task force
serves as a resource, helping other
criminal defense attorneys in the
state deal with forensic issues. Ms.
Blair is also on a committee to help
plan the Fall Public Defender’s
Conference which will focus exclusively on forensic science. Finally,
Ms. Blair and NCPLS Senior Staff
Attorney Phil Griffin are scheduled to speak at Fayetteville State
University’s distinguished lecturer
series on the topic of the use and
misuse of forensic evidence.

In a third case, a motion for appropriate relief alleging an incorrect

REPORT REGARDING
CONTRACT LEGAL WORK
During the second quarter of 2006
(April – June), NCPLS received
3,095 requests for legal assistance
from our clients. A total of 5,713.3
attorney hours were spent on our
work: 3,173 hours on civil cases,
2,431.9 hours on post-conviction
cases, and 108.4 hours on courtappointed cases. Our paralegals
spent an additional 5,835.3 hours:
2,262 hours were spent on civil
cases; 3,568.2 hours on post-conviction cases, and 5.1 hours on
court-appointed cases. Interns con-

tributed an additional 200.7 hours:
132 hours on civil cases and 28.7
hours on post-conviction cases.
NCPLS is working to resolve 2,903
cases. Among these, two civil lawsuits and 15 post-conviction lawsuits were filed this quarter. We
also received from the federal court
18 orders to investigate prisoner
legal claims. We presently have
54 cases in litigation, 26 of which
are civil and 28 are post-conviction. Eleven litigation cases were
resolved.

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 3

THE INNOCENCE INQUIRY COMMISSION
(CONTINUED)
(Continued from Page 1)

Commission Composition
& Scope of Work
Established as an independent body
to review claims of actual innocence, appointments to the Commission have been made by the
Chief Justice of the N.C. Supreme
Court and the Chief Judge of the
N.C. Court of Appeals. The Commission consists of eight appointed
members, including a superior
court judge, a prosecuting attorney,
a victims’ advocate, a criminal
defense lawyer, a non-attorney
member of the public, and a sheriff.
The Commission’s work will begin
on November 1, 2006. On that
date, any court, agency, or person
may refer an innocence claim to
the Commission. However, until
November 1, 2008, the Commission will not accept for review
the claims of people who entered
a guilty plea. (Note that Alford
pleas and no contest pleas may be
referred to the Commission along
with not guilty pleas starting this
November.) For a claim to be considered, the convicted person must
have been convicted in a North
Carolina court and must be living.
Since this is a first-of-its-kind
initiative, the new law applies to
claims filed by December 31, 2010.
Future legislation may extend the
existence of the Commission.
Powers of the Commission
The determination whether to grant
a formal inquiry is entirely in the
discretion of the Commission. The

Commission may informally screen
and dismiss a case summarily (that
is, without notice or a hearing).
(However, the Commission may
not arbitrarily exercise that discretion. Rather, it has a duty to establish criteria and a screening process
which is to be applied in reviewing
all case acceptance decisions.)
The Commission has broad powers
of investigation, including the ability to compel witnesses to attend
and produce evidence, petition the
superior court for enforcement of
process or other relief, and create
its own rules of procedure.
According to its proponents, these
powers increase the possibility
that evidence of innocence will be
uncovered. Following the inquisitorial model (and in contrast to
the adversarial process of criminal
prosecution), the Commission has
the authority to require all parties to disclose information. For
example, if a prosecutor refuses to
cooperate, the Commission Chair
(who is also a superior court judge)
will be able to impose sanctions.
A benefit for those convicted under
the earlier limited discovery rules
is that the Commission’s authority
to access government files may reveal information favorable to these
claimants. The Commission’s
investigatory powers are especially
important in noncapital cases:
under current law the State is only
required to open its files to defendants prosecuting collateral challenges in capital cases. N.C. Gen.
Stat. §15A-1415(f) (2005).

Decisions by the Commission
and the three-judge panel are not
subject to review by a court. The
absence of such a review reflects
the extraordinary nature of the
process and does not preclude the
unsuccessful claimant from seeking other relief through a motion
for appropriate relief (MAR), for
example.
Commission Procedures
While one purpose of the Commission is to provide a more effective
and expedited process for reviewing innocence claims than exists
under the current system, complex
and demanding procedural hurdles
must be surmounted. In summary,
a person must: (1) Make a claim
of factual and complete innocence
of any criminal responsibility for
the felony conviction; (2) Cooperate fully with the formal inquiry by
waiving all procedural safeguards
and privileges (such as the right
against self-incrimination, attorneyclient confidentiality, and spousal
immunity); (3) Attend the Commission hearing and secure enough
votes from Commission members
to have the case referred to superior court for review (a conviction
after pleading not guilty requires
at least five members of the Commission to agree; a conviction by
guilty plea requires the agreement
of all eight commissioners); and
(4) Attend the evidentiary hearing
of a three-judge panel which must
unanimously conclude that clear
(Continued on Page 11)

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 4

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

DOC EDUCATIONAL
PROGRAMS A SUCCESS
Dealing with the concerns of our
clients, our focus is most often
fixed on deficiencies and problems
within the prison system. We do
not often pay enough attention to
the successes that correctional
professionals and our clients
achieve. The educational program
offered by the N.C. Department of
Correction in partnership with the
Community College System is an
example.
Dozens of studies have shown that
education beyond a high school
diploma or a GED (post-secondary
education) has a variety of benefits,
including heightened self-esteem
for participants, better communication between prisoners and
officers, fewer disciplinary infractions and improved conditions
of confinement in those facilities
that offer post-secondary education. See, for example, Wendy
Erisman, Jeanne Bayer Contardo,
Learning to Reduce Recidivism: A
50-State Analysis of Postsecondary Correctional Education Policy,
Institute for Higher Education
Policy (November 2005) (hereafter,
“Learning to Reduce Recidivism”).
www.ihep.org; download at:
www.ihep.org/Pubs/PDF/
Recidivism.pdf (last accessed July
1, 2006).
However, “the most important
benefit of postsecondary correctional education is the prospect of
improved chances for employment
after release from prison,” and a
much better chance to stay out of
prison after release. Learning to
Reduce Recidivism, p. 8. “Reduced

recidivism for prisoners who had
participated in postsecondary
correctional education . . . were,
on average, 46% lower than for

ex-offenders who had not taken
college classes. Id. at p. 9 (citation
omitted). In other words, prisoners who gain skills and education
while in prison are better prepared
to re-enter society, secure employment, and contribute to society,
rather than returning to prison.
Education is especially important
in North Carolina. In 1997, 40%
of the prison population had not
attained a high school diploma or
its equivalent. By 2004, the typical
inmate entering prison read at the
9th grade level and “can successfully solve mathematics problems
at 7th grade level.” David Edwards,
MRP, Research Brief: Educational
Attainment of Inmates Entering
North Carolina’s Prisons, p.1 (July
2005), NCDOC Office of Research
& Planning.

It is widely known that DOC
makes post-secondary education
available to some of our prisoners,
but according to a recent study,
North Carolina “was second only
to Texas in the number of prisoners
enrolled in postsecondary correctional education as of 2003-04.”
Learning to Reduce Recidivism, p.
15. [Of course, the Texas prison
system has a population in excess
of 150,000 people, whereas North
Carolina’s population is about a
third that size.] North Carolina
offered “postsecondary educational
programming in almost all of the
state’s prisons during the 20032004 academic year. Enrollment
reached 9,220 prisoners—nearly
22 percent of the more than 42,000
prisoners who passed through the
prison system in 2003 and fully
two-thirds of those who held a
high school diploma or GED. In
2003-2004, North Carolina prisoners were awarded more than 7,000
vocational certificates and 600
associate’s degrees for an 86 percent overall completion rate, one of
the highest among survey respondents.” Id. (emphasis added).
The success of educational programs in North Carolina prisons
results from a culture of support
among correctional professionals
and elected officials, fostering a
long-term administrative and
financial cooperation between the
Department of Corrections and the
North Carolina Community College System.
(Continued on Page 5)

NCPLS ACCESS

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

Page 5

DOC EDUCATIONAL
PROGRAMS A SUCCESS
(CONTINUED)
(Continued from Page 4)

Education is one of the most
important factors in preparing
inmates for a successful, productive
life after prison. It affords prisoners an opportunity to re-direct
their lives, re-establish family ties
and community connections, and
engage in productive activities
which contribute to our society. It
is sound public policy to invest

resources in programs that improve
the lives of prisoners and produce
such positive results.
While there are many ways our
correctional system could be
improved, education seems to be
one area in which North Carolina is
doing well. Further information is
available from:

Rose True
Director of Educational Services
831 West Morgan Street
4264 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699-4264
www.doc.state.nc.us/dop/education/
index.htm

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION’S
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTION
At the annual meeting of the American Bar Association (ABA) in
August, the Criminal Justice Section (CJS) elected NCPLS Director
Michael Hamden to a three-year
term on its governing body, the
CJS Council.
The ABA’s Criminal Justice Section is comprised of prosecutors,
defense lawyers, judges, corrections officials and scholars who
collaborate to speak as a unified
national voice for criminal justice.
The Section provides valuable

leadership to the legal profession
and the nation by developing and
recommending policies and procedures for the administration of the
justice system.
Among the policy recommendations considered at the August
meeting were (1) encouraging the
use of alternatives to conviction

and incarceration for less serious
offenders; (2) the use of graduated
sanctions for probation and parole
violations; and (3) an initiative to
support state agencies and licensing
boards in repealing employment
restrictions and disqualifications
applied to former prisoners that are
not substantially related to particular job requirements.

Page 6

NCPLS ACCESS

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

PRISON ART
The Prisons Foundation is a
501(c)(3) non-profit organization
based in Washington, DC that
promotes the arts and education in
prison and alternatives to incarceration.
The following works of art were
created by prisoners and featured
in the Art of Prison Survival, a
bimonthly publication of the Prisons Foundation. The Foundation
is a nonprofit organization based in
Washington, DC, that promotes arts
and education in prison and alternatives to incarceration. The Prisons

Foundation is sponsored by the Art
Appreciation Foundation with support from the DC Commission on
the Arts and Humanities.
Revenue from sales of prison art
exhibits sponsored by the Foundation goes to prison artists where
rules permit it or to an artist-designated charity, to services that focus
on prisoner education, rehabilitation and preparation for release,
and to groups that assist victims of
crime, such as the Annual National
Forum on Victims’ Rights.

The first editions of the Art of
Prison Survival can be downloaded
at: www.prisonsfoundation.org/
aops1.pdf. (last accessed July 1,
2006). Subscriptions are available
to non-prisoners for a donation of
$25 or more; prisoners may subscribe for a donation of $2 or more.
Write to:
Prisons Foundation
1718 M Street, NW, #151
Washington, DC 20036.

Untitled - Frederick Benjamin “Ben” Thompson
Ballpoint pen and a stippling technique, applying
thousands of dots to paper
South Woods State Prison
Bridgeton, New Jersey
The Art of Prison Survival at p.11

“Oz” - Dwayne Murray
Acrylic on paper (2004)
Stillwater Correctional Facility
Bayport, Minnesota
Dwayne Murray, 41, works in watercolor and acrylic
on rag paper, or draws with graphite and colored pencil
to create his surreal pieces on psychological and social
themes
www.prisonsfoundation.org/prints/oz.html
(last acessed July 1, 2006)

(Continued on Page 7)

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 7

PRISON ART
(CONTINUED)
(Continued from Page 6)

“We Too Sing America by Langston Hughes” - Ritchie Weatherspoon
Pastels on art paper (2004)
Iona Maximum Correctional Facility
Ionia, Michigan
Ritchie Weatherspoon, 37, who has been incarcerated for 19 years, works
in soft pastels. His “We Too Sing America by Langston Hughes” (2004)
symbolizes the meaning of the late great African American poet Langston
Hughes’ poem titled “We Too Sing America” “Because no matter how ...
divided we are ... or different we are ... we are all Americans.”
www.prisonsfoundation.org/prints/america.html
(last acessed July 1, 2006)

“Full Moon Rising” - Ted Berkey
Oils on canvas (2004)
Federal Correctional Institution
Tuscan, Arizona
Ted Berkey, 53, is a prison artist with no formal art training who
works primarily in oils. He’s been painting for nine years.
www.prisonsfoundation.org/prints/moon.html
(last acessed July 1, 2006)

“Abstracts” - Michael Jewell
Acrylic on paper
Powledge Unit State Prison
Palestine, Texas
Michael Jewell, 58, has been in prison for 33 years. Formerly on
death row, Jewell is now serving a life sentence.
www.prisonsfoundation.org/prints/abstracts.html
(last acessed July 1, 2006)

(Continued on Page 11)

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 8

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE RELEASES
PRISONER RESEARCH STUDY
A report released July 12 by the
National Academies of Science,
Institute of Medicine concludes
that more comprehensive safeguards and oversight measures are
needed to ensure that the participation of prisoners in scientific
research meets the highest ethical
standards and aims to improve
the well-being of prisoners.

not always kept pace with this
growth. In addition, an increasingly large number of people from
disadvantaged groups, such as
racial minorities and people who
have mental illnesses or com-

Interest in this issue is well justified. The historical exploitation
of prisoners – including the surreptitious, deliberate infection of
research subjects with debilitating and deadly diseases simply
to test experimental treatments;
exposure to life threatening
and lethal chemicals to develop
cosmetic products; and even
more horrendous, depraved acts
-- chronicle a shameful past that
must never be permitted to recur.
In the late 1970s, the U.S. government implemented federal legislation to protect human subjects in
scientific research, including a section that provides limited protection for certain prisoners involved
in federally funded research. The
section dealing with prisoners
(Title 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 46 Subpart C) is commonly
referred to as Subpart C of the
Common Rule.
Since the 70’s, the population of
the U.S. correctional system -including inmates and people on
probation or parole -- has increased
almost fivefold, and prisoners’
access to adequate health care has

ons or jails. The extent of control
exerted over a prisoner is correlative to the potential for coercion -in other words, the more controlled
the correctional setting, the greater
the potential for coercion. And
restrictions on privacy, liberty,
and autonomy all bear upon the
capacity of a prisoner to give
meaningful consent to participate
in human research.
The existing regulations take no
account of these divergent circumstances and apply only to a
few federal agencies and private
institutions that voluntarily adopt
them. To the extent feasible, the
regulations are enforced nationally by a four-person cadre in
the Office of Human Research
Protections.

municable diseases, are under the
supervision of the criminal justice
system in a variety of settings.
Another significant change in the
past 30 years can be seen in the
proliferation of dissimilar correctional settings, including probation,
house-arrest, community service,
half-way houses, boot camps, and
traditional correctional facilities
(from pretrial detention, to
minimum custody work-release
facilities, to the highly restrictive
“super-max” prisons). Of nearly
seven million people under the
supervision of the criminal justice
system in 2004, only about two
million were incarcerated in pris-

Beyond the reach of these federal
regulations, ethical concerns are
left to researchers, themselves.
The existing regime provides
prisoners precious little protection. Indeed, most research with
prisoners now takes place outside
the scope of federal regulations
and often without the scrutiny of
institutional review boards.
Because prisoners face restrictions
on liberty and autonomy, limited
privacy, and too often inadequate
health care, they require specific
protections when involved in
research, particularly in today’s
correctional settings. Thus, as
reported in the March 2005 edition
of ACCESS, the National Academies
(Continued on Page 9)

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 9

INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE RELEASES
PRISONER RESEARCH STUDY
(CONTINUED)
(Continued from Page 8)

of Science commissioned the
Institute of Medicine to re-examine
the ethical considerations for the
protection of prisoners involved in
research. After almost 18 months
of study and deliberation, the Committee on Ethical Considerations
for Revisions to DHHS Regulations
for Protection of Prisoners Participating as Subjects in Research
formulated a number of recommendations in the interest of prisoners. These recommendations are
intended to strengthen protections
in a number of ways.
One of the most important is a
recommendation to redefine the
term “prisoner” to encompass
everyone enmeshed in the criminal
justice system, thereby extending
human subject protections beyond
the prison gates to many more
people. The committee further
recommended the establishment of
universal, consistent standards that
apply to all prisoner research irrespective of sponsorship (whether
private or public).
The IOM committee also called on
Congress to create a comprehensive national database that tracks
all studies involving prisoners,
and further urged the creation of a
robust system of national oversight
and enforcement.

Existing regulations rest on narrow,
ambiguous research categories
that are subject to varying interpretations. The committee recommended a paradigm shift from that
“categorical approach” to a “risk/
benefit” analysis. Ethically permissible research must offer potential
benefits to prisoners that outweigh
the risks. This framework makes
clear that studies offering no potential benefit to subjects would be
precluded.
Of course, voluntary and meaningful consent will continue to be a
cornerstone requirement of ethical
research involving human subjects.
In the context of correctional settings, consent can be meaningful
only where prisoners have reasonably prompt access to decent health
care services (including medical,
mental, and dental services) and are
not otherwise coerced to participate.
For many reasons, we should care
deeply about issues involving the
health and welfare of prisoners,
implementing appropriate measures
to protect them from harm. Prisoners are family members, friends,
and former neighbors. Most
prisoners (about 95% of the population) will eventually return to our

communities. (Nationally, more
than 600,000 prisoners are released
every year.) Prisoners are afflicted
in greater percentages than the general population with maladies such
as HIV, tuberculosis, and Hepatitis. Access to adequate health care
and beneficial research minimize
the risk that untreated conditions
may spread and threaten the public
health.
“Humane, respectful treatment of
all prisoners is a hallmark of decent
society,” said committee chair
Lawrence O. Gostin, associate dean
and professor of law, Georgetown
University Law Center, Washington, D.C. The committee was
comprised of 16 doctors, lawyers,
ethicists, and scholars, including
Michael S. Hamden, executive
director of NCPLS.
Copies of the report, “Ethical Considerations for Research Involving
Prisoners,” are available from:
National Academies Press
500 Fifth Street, N.W.
Lockbox 285
Washington, DC 20055
www.nap.edu

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 10

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

Prison Legal News
Founder Visits NCPLS
The editor and founder of Prison
Legal News (PLN), Paul Wright,
visited the office of NCPLS on
August 28, 2006.
Mr. Wright served 17 years
in Washington State prisons on a murder conviction
– from 1987 through 2003.
Paul started PLN 15 years
ago while he was incarcerated. He is the editor of
two collections, “The Celling of
America: An Inside Look at the US
Prison Industry” (Common Cour-

age, 1997) and “Prison Nation:
The Warehousing of America’s
Poor” (Routledge, 2003). Addi-

tionally, he has written and spoken
extensively throughout the U.S.

on criminal justice issues. Paul is
also the national jailhouse lawyer
co-vice president of the National
Lawyers Guild.
Favorably impressed with
the technology NCPLS
utilizes to deliver effective and efficient client
services, Mr. Wright commented during his tour
that he is not aware of any
other prisoner advocacy organization that provides such a broad
array of services.

- ADVERTISEMENT PRISON LEGAL NEWS
Prison Legal News (PLN) is an
independent, 48-page monthly
magazine that has been published
since 1990. It reports on all aspects
of the criminal justice system from
all fifty states and around the
world. It has the most extensive
reporting on detention facility
litigation and news of any publication. Contents include columns
by lawyers aimed at assisting pro
se prisoner litigants with habeas
corpus and civil rights litigation.
Regularly covered topics include
verdicts and settlements, disciplinary hearings, medical issues,
excessive force, death row, tele-

phones, mail regulations, religious
freedom, court access, habeas
corpus, misconduct and corruption
by prison and jail employees, state
and federal legislation, the Prison
Litigation Reform Act (PLRA),
conditions of confinement and
much, much more.
PLN also distributes books dealing
with litigation, self-help and the
criminal justice system. Each issue
contains ads from many businesses
and organizations providing services and products aimed at the
prisoner market. Subscriptions for
prisoners are $18 per year (sub-

scriptions can be pro rated at $1.50
per issue - do not send less than
$9.00); $25 per year for non-prisoners and $60 per year for professionals and institutions. Sample
copies are available for $2.00. You
can contact PLN at:
Prison Legal News
Dept. NC, 2400 NW 80th Street
PMB 148, Seattle, WA 98117
www.prisonlegalnews.org
Phone (206) 246-1022
[Editor’s Note: Prison Legal
News is not affiliated with NCPLS
or ACCESS.]

Volume VI, Issue 3, September 2006

NCPLS ACCESS

Page 11

THE INNOCENCE INQUIRY COMMISSION
(CONTINUED)
(Continued from Page 3)

and convincing evidence supports a
favorable verdict.

victed of serious criminal acts, and
thereby to restore public confidence
in the justice system.

Conclusion
The North Carolina Innocence
Inquiry Commission is the first of
its kind in the nation. Its primary
purposes are to reduce the number
of innocent people who are con-

Complex and rigorous procedures
and standards will apply to all
cases the Commission selects for
formal inquiries. Additional information regarding these procedures
can be obtained at the following

address:
N.C. Center on Actual Innocence
P.O. Box 52446
Shannon Plaza Station
Durham, NC 27717-2446
or NCPLS.

PRISON ART
(CONTINUED)
(Continued from Page 7)

“Vision of Miles” - Brian Cole
Acrylic and ink on art paper (2004)
Rivers Correctional Institution
Winton, North Carolina
Brian Cole, 52, has been incarcerated since 1989. He works in charcoal, acrylic,
pastels and oil, primarily picturing musicians and creating musical abstracts. His
“Vision of Miles” (2004) is a portrait of jazz legend Miles Davis.
www.prisonsfoundation.org/prints/moon.html
(last acessed July 1, 2006)
*The artwork pictured at left and above was created with the permission and support of
correctional professionals. However, some works of art are created outside the rules.

Outlaw Art

Untitled - Donny Johnson
Dye created from M&M candy; brushes from hair
Pelican Bay Sate Prison
Crescent City, California
Donny Johnson is serving a life sentence in the most secure unit at Pelican Bay.
Because prisoners are not allowed to have art materials in their cells, Johnson
employs unusual material. The painting pictured resulted in a disciplinary
charge for engaging in an unauthorized business.

THE NEWSLETTER OF NORTH CAROLINA
PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

1110 Wake Forest Road
P.O. Box 25397
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone: (919) 856-2200
Fax: (919) 856-2223
Email: tsanders@ncpls.org

Visit our website at:
http://www.ncpls.org