Gomez

Pro-Family Advocates v. Gomez

Bad Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 641·46 Cal. App. 4th 1674·54 Cal. Rptr. 2d 600·96 Daily Journal DAR 7921·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4962
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1996A070532California4,037 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

In this appeal by the Director of the California Department of Corrections, we must determine whether the trial court erred by issuing a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of an administrative regulation excluding certain prisoners from participation in the overnight family visiting program. We hold that the regulation does not constitute an ex post facto law, nor does it violate equal protection. Thus, the trial court erred and we reverse the preliminary injunction.

I. Facts

In April 1995, appellant James Gomez—acting in his capacity as Director of the State Department of Corrections—promulgated a regulation prohibiting family visits for specified state prison inmates. The restrictions—which were to take effect on May 30, 1995—applied to inmates convicted of certain sex offenses; those convicted of violent offenses committed against a family member or a minor; those sentenced to life terms; long-term inmates temporarily classified to close custody; and inmates whose case factors indicate that their participation in the family visiting program would be incompatible with public safety.

Respondent Pro-Family Advocates was then in the midst of litigation…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.