Legislation Quick Search
03/28/2024 06:29 AM
Pennsylvania House of Representatives
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/Legis/CSM/showMemoPublic.cfm?chamber=H&SPick=20150&cosponId=20252
Share:
Home / House Co-Sponsorship Memoranda

House Co-Sponsorship Memoranda

Subscribe to PaLegis Notifications
NEW!

Subscribe to receive notifications of new Co-Sponsorship Memos circulated

By Member | By Date | Keyword Search


House of Representatives
Session of 2015 - 2016 Regular Session

MEMORANDUM

Posted: May 18, 2016 11:17 AM
From: Representative Jason Ortitay and Rep. Dom Costa
To: All House members
Subject: Prohibiting Inmate use of "Pen Pal" Websites
 
In the near future, we will introduce legislation to prohibit Pennsylvania inmates from placing advertisements on so-called “pen pal” websites and similar venues, either directly or with the assistance of third parties.

This issue recently came to our attention when we found out that an inmate convicted of murdering three Pittsburgh police officers was advertising on the website ConvictPenPal.com, seeking “friendship” and “legal help.” On April 4th 2009, in the Stanton Heights neighborhood, Richard Poplawski shot and killed three Pittsburgh Police officers (Officers Paul Sciullo, Stephen Mayhle and Eric Kelly) and wounded two others (Officers Tim McManaway and Brian Jones). Poplawski was sentenced to death on June 28, 2011 after being found guilty of three counts of first degree murder. He is currently housed at Graterford SCI.

There is no way to know for sure how many Pennsylvania inmates are using this website or other commercial means to find new “pen pals.” It would be fair to say hundreds, and maybe thousands. But, we learned that inmates like Poplawski routinely place these types of ads in hopes to develop multiple pen pals from whom they would then defraud money (and other perks). This conduct is contrary to the interests of the Department of Corrections and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Similar bans have been upheld in Florida and Indiana. See Perry v. Sec'y, Florida Dep't of Corr., 664 F.3d 1359 (11th Cir. 2011); and, Woods v. Comm'r of the Ind. Dep't of Corr., 652 F.3d 745, 751 (7th Cir. 2011). Both the 7th and the 11th Circuit Courts of Appeal have upheld those state bans under the authority of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1987 opinion in Turner v. Safley (where the Court considered challenges to Missouri’s regulations on inmate-to-inmate correspondence and inmate marriages).

In Turner, the Court set out the following four factors to help courts in determining the reasonableness of a regulation:

• Whether there is “a valid, rational connection between the regulation and the prison legitimate governmental interest.”

• Whether there are alternative means of exercising the right.

• The impact accommodation of the asserted constitutional right will have on guards and other inmates, and on the allocation of prison resources.”

• The existence of obvious, easy alternatives [, which] may be evidence that the regulation is not reasonable, but is an exaggerated response to prison concerns.”

Unlike other types of inmate expression which require such regulation to pass a strict scrutiny test for constitutionality, the federal courts apply a rational basis test in which the burden is placed on the inmate to determine whether the regulation is rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest. Prevention of fraud is such an interest.

We urge you add your name to the list of cosponsors to help protect unsuspecting individuals from these efforts to defraud them out of their hard earned dollars. Inmate pen pal websites offend the sensibilities and do little more than facilitate inmate fraud. We can and should do something to stop it.

I hope you will join us in cosponsoring this important piece of legislation.



Introduced as HB2132