Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

U.S. v. GOTTI

January 18, 1991

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOHN GOTTI, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Glasser, District Judge:

  MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

The defendants Gotti, Gravano and Locascio obtained the issuance of an order directing George Wigen, the Warden of the Metropolitan Correction Center ("MCC"), and the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, to show cause why an order releasing the defendants or, in the alternative, modifying the conditions of their pretrial detention should not be entered. A reply affidavit was submitted by William M. Bailey, Associate Warden of the MCC, and a letter response was submitted by the United States Attorney.

The affidavits in support of the relief sought were not submitted by the defendants but by their attorneys, each of whom states that the facts contained in his affidavit are based upon his own personal knowledge, except where stated to be based upon information and belief. The affidavit of each is identical beyond stating that based upon his own observation his client is in administrative detention, each affiant states that he has been advised by his client that:

  (1) he has not been provided any oral or written
  explanation as to why he is confined in administrative
  detention;
  (2) he has not been given notice of or opportunity to
  attend any hearing related to his confinement under
  that status, nor has he waived his right to be present
  at such a hearing;
  (3) he has been segregated from other pretrial
  detainees at the MCC;
  (4) Gotti and Gravano have been segregated from
  Locascio and have been permitted to communicate with
  him only during visits by counsel or family members;
  (5) he has been locked in a small cell with inadequate
  lighting for 23 hours each day;
  (6) he has been denied access to newspapers, radio and
  television;
  (7) he has been denied access to the exercise
  facilities of the MCC and as his only opportunity for
  recreation, has been invited to the roof of the MCC at
  7:45 a.m. in freezing temperatures and in snow;
  (8) he has been denied adequate access to showering
  facilities;
  (9) he has been limited to one ten-minute telephone
  call each day between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00
  p.m.;
  (10) his one ten-minute telephone call per day has
  been monitored in that MCC officials listen to what he
  is saying even when he is speaking to his attorneys;
  (11) he is required to seek special authorization days
  in advance to make additional phone calls, even to his
  attorneys.

Predicated upon those assertions, the defendants urge that their detention is unconstitutional ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.