The Board strongly urges DOC to adopt a policy of verifying the functionality of an inmate’s electronics before and after each cell search and documenting that verification on a form signed by the inmate. The Board concludes the claim should be paid in the reduced amount of $94.94 based on equitable principles. The Board further concludes, under authority of § 16.007 (6m), Stats., payment should be made from the Department of Corrections appropriation § 20.410 (1)(a), Stats. 7. Charles Sheppard of Boscobel, Wisconsin, claims $284.77 for value of publications confiscated and destroyed by Department of Corrections staff at the Wisconsin Secure Program Facility. Claimant states that in June 2016, DOC staff took all of his books and magazines during an institution shakedown, because he was allegedly over the allowed limit for publications. Claimant states that he immediately told DOC staff that he was going to file an inmate complaint through the ICRS process and appeal the complaint if he lost. His initial complaint was denied, and he filed his appeal on July 25, 2016. However, DOC destroyed his publications on July 27, 2016, before his appeal was complete. Claimant believes that destruction of his property prior to his completion of the ICRS process was in violation of Wisconsin’s Administrative Code. Claimant points to the fact that the ICRS is a two-step process and he had given DOC notice that he would pursue an appeal. Claimant also states that he was not given written notice of the destruction of his property pursuant to Wis. Admin. Code DOC 309.020(d)(3). He believes this rule provides that he must be given notice prior to the destruction of his property and allowed a chance to mail out the property. Claimant alleges that DOC staff destroyed his property early in retaliation for a previous grievance he filed.
DOC recommends denial of this claim. Claimant was found to be over the limit for publications during an institution shakedown. DOC staff reviewed the confiscated publications during the ICRS investigation and found that 4 were not permitted in the institution, 16 were not properly identified as belonging to claimant per DOC rules, and 7 were damaged or altered and therefore considered contraband. Four publications were returned to claimant and the remainder were destroyed. DOC notes that it is required to give inmates notice within 10 days of property destruction not prior to destruction, as claimant asserts. The appropriate notice was provided to claimant. Finally, DOC notes that on appeal, staff found that the destruction of the 27 publications was upheld and no reimbursement to claimant was warranted because he was over the limit for publications.
The Board concludes there has been an insufficient showing of negligence on the part of the state, its officers, agents or employees and this claim is neither one for which the state is legally liable nor one which the state should assume and pay based on equitable principles.
8. Charles D. Washington of Stanley, Wisconsin, claims $148.78 for monies deducted from his inmate account which allegedly had been previously paid. Claimant states that prior to October 2016, the Department of Corrections’ accounting system (WITS) showed he owed $1,118.25 in obligations for case no. 04CF3405. In late 2016, DOC switched to a new accounting system (WICS). Both the old and new systems showed claimant had paid $523.91 towards this obligation, however, upon implementation of the WICS system, his balance due increased, even though the system showed an overpayment of $148.76. Claimant believes DOC has not accounted for $353.75 of the money deducted from his account. He requests reimbursement of either $353.75 or $148.76, whichever the board feels is more appropriate.
During the transfer to a new inmate accounting system, WICS, claimant’s court-ordered obligations for case no. 04CF3405 were adjusted to account for surcharges previously not included under the old accounting system (WITS). As WICS was implemented, $491.99 in payments made by claimant was applied to three of his cases, including 04CF3405. The distribution of his payments has been explained to claimant and he is incorrect that DOC has not accounted for $353.75. In 2005, an incorrect JOC was issued for case no. 04CF3405. The JOC stated that one of claimant’s victims, R.K., was due “4100.00” when it should have said “$100.00.” DOC received a corrected JOC in October 2016 and made the change to claimant’s accounts, resulting in $148.76 overpayment. By the time DOC received the corrected JOC, the overpaid amount had already been disbursed to R.K. Pursuant to DAI Policy 309.45.02, “If an inmate receives an amended JOC, DAI is not responsible to seek reimbursement from the entity who received the funds.” DOC properly deducted and paid out these funds based on the JOC received from the court and promptly corrected claimant’s obligations when the amended JOC was received.
The Board concludes there has been an insufficient showing of negligence on the part of the state, its officers, agents or employees and this claim is neither one for which the state is legally liable nor one which the state should assume and pay based on equitable principles.
The Board concludes:
That the following identified claimants are denied:
Beverly Sinople
Hayward Bait & Bottle Shoppe
Northside Enterprises
Calvin L. Brown, Jr.
Charles Sheppard
Charles D. Washington
That payment of the amounts below to the identified claimants from the following statutory appropriations is justified under § 16.007 (6)(b), Stats: That pursuant to the request of the Department of Children& Families, the May 22, 2018 Claims Board decision for the claim of Shanquil Bey is amended to show payment from the Department of Children & Families appropriation, § 20.437 (3)(pz), Stats. Dated at Madison, Wisconsin this 2nd day of October, 2018.
COREY FINKELMEYER
Chair, Representative of the Attorney General
CHRISTOPHER N. GREEN
Secretary, Representative of the Secretary of Administration
LUTHER OLSEN
Senate Finance Committee
MARY FELZKOWSKI
Assembly Finance Committee
KATIE E. IGNATOWSKI
Representative of the Governor
