The California Department of Corrections officially sanctioned method to resolve prison related issues is the inmate appeal system. The instrument for adjudicating these issues is a CDC 602 form, a green sheet titled "Inmate appeal form." California courts generally require prisoners to use the administrative appeal system before filing a court action. If a prisoner has not exhausted this administrative remedy the petition will usually be denied.

Do 602s work?

It is generally believed that the inmate appeal system does not work. While that is true up to a point, it will be a surprise to many that 602s do work! However, the appeal has to be an issue suitable for 602s and it must be presented with the proper formula, guidelines and tactics in mind to make it successful.

The presentation

The issue presented, how it is presented, and the relief asked for are the most important parts of a 602. The types of issues easiest to resolve are those that involve daily prison life. Institutional rights and privileges, acts and decisions by staff, minor living conditions, and 115s or 128s - those problems that will not have dramatic repercussions on a large scale.

Generally, issues that affect only you on a personal level are good fodder for 602s. However, avoid minor issues that do not have great or long term effects on you, and deal carefully with those which challenge rules or regulations or have wide-spread, dramatic effects. Some issues are rarely winnable, such as those based on improper staff conduct, and should be avoided. I once asked an attorney how well he does in trial. He told me, "I've won the last 5 out of 6." That sounds impressive, but he neglected to tell me he had "plea bargained" hundreds in the period he went to trial with the six. The lesson is, if you file 602s on issues which can be proved in a literate manner and logical fashion, you will have a high success rate. The presentation is the second most important component for success. For example, two convicts can file a 602 on the same issue and yet receive opposite decisions because one is functionally illiterate while the other can effectively express himself. It is a sad comment of the appeal system when a fair hearing of the issue is dependent upon the method of presentation, especially when a large percentage of prisoners are unable to effectively express themselves in writing. Illiteracy is thus the primary reason 602s are seen as a waste of time.

Don't rush

Before writing a 602 you may want to wait for 3 or more days to give yourself time to consider all the options and issues. It is common to make fundamental presentation errors when you hastily submit an appeal. Never begin a 602 when you are angry, because your anger will inevitably taint your objectivity and only defeat your chances of winning. After you've written a rough draft, put it aside and make notes of new ideas or angles that come to mind. In another day or two re-read it, edit and re-write where necessary to complete the final draft. This process will take a great deal of effort, but if you are unwilling to devote such an effort, then the issue may not be important enough for you.

How to write it

Begin by getting the facts and events arranged in chronological order, using as many dates and times as possible. Identify persons by name and position, reporting who said or did what and where. For example: on 8-18-02 in the afternoon I talked to counselor Doe in his office. I asked him to explain how he had arrived at the newly computed classification score. He said (quote his own words if you can). I sometimes have paper and pen ready so I can write what is said as soon as I leave the office. It is usually better to quote than paraphrase. Although sometimes it's best not to quote yourself so that you can clarify any misinterpretations. Continue describing the events: what you did, what the staff did, when you received documents, etc.

The first time you use a staff person's name, indicate his or her title. E.G. PA, LT, SGT, CC-1, C/O, etc. Thereafter, use only the last name, deleting the title. As you continue with your rendition of events, do not emphasize the inmate or staff status of an individual. From a subconscious psychological standpoint, this reinforces that all of the participants are equally believable. However, you should use a staff person's full title throughout when they support your contention. The best evidence is that provided by staff. Written statements by inmates are rarely effective. Usually, the more the staff members write - e.g., in 602 responses, 115s, 128s, memorandums, etc - the better. What you want is an abundance of staff - written materials to draw from the best evidence to support your side of the issue will always be their admissions and statements. If staff members provide a great amount of written material you can usually find and angle to support your issue. Sometimes you can even get them to create evidence for you. The key, however, is to get staff to commit themselves to a specific line of reasoning in writing before they know you will be filing a 602.

I once wrote to two counselors, separately, and at the same time using identical letters. I asked them to reply to my question on the reverse side and return the letters to me. I told neither about the letter to the other. Not surprisingly, I received different, incongruent responses. I submitted these two inconsistent letters as evidence. The lesson: get staff to commit themselves, in writing, on an issue before they know what the issue is or that a 602 will be filed.

When you describe events and issues, make your sentences short, simple and direct, using the fewest words possible. Do not use descriptive words that are personal judgments or opinions. For example, write: "this is untrue", not: "this is a lie!" And instead of: "he angrily yelled at me," just state: "he spoke to me in a raised voice." Downplay extremes and report them in a neutral way. Reporting only the simple, unadulterated facts will get the best results. Do not try to force your ideas or judgments on the reader. Let the appeal reviewer formulate his or her own opinions. But try to provide information and evidence that naturally leads the reviewer to share your conclusion.

Ideally, a 602 should present only a single issue. If there are more than 2 issues, ti is best to present the strongest two. If this can't be done, file two 602s a week or two apart. However, this way you run the risk of having the appeals coordinator consolidate them or reject the second one. When writing your description of events, avoid reporting on side issues or information that is only peripherally relevant. The argument should be as simple and uncomplicated as possible. The reviewer may use peripheral issues to dodge the primary one. And if your description is too complicated the reviewer will probably either ignore or be unable to comprehend the main issue. After your complete the chronological Description of events, begin a new paragraph clearly summarizing the issue. For example, write: There is only one issue to this appeal, it is: (describe it in as few words as possible). Next, explain your reasoning and counter the objections likely to be put forth by the reviewer.

Weaving the defensive net

It is invariably a mistake to withhold a line of reasoning or an angle of attack to spring it on the last or 3rd level of review. When writing your interpretation of the issue, after the description of events, try to second guess possible objections and then explain how or why they do not apply. You want to elicit responses to all angles and issues at the earliest levels so you can counter all objections and defenses before the final review. You need the opportunity at each level of review to counter all possible objections so the third level reviewer can find no reasons to deny your appeal. If the third level reviewer raises a defense you have not countered you will not have any opportunity to disprove that rationalization. We have a net of defenses so tight that the reviewers will not find a hole large enough for them to deny your appeal.

The closing

I always finish a 602 with a conclusion restating the primary issue and the reasoning for the conclusion using no more than 4 or 5 short sentences. Depending on the issues, it is sometimes best to include a paragraph that is essentially what you would like the reviewer to write. Providing a short reasonable explanation for granting the appeal you can lead them to the conclusion you want.

Automatic defeat

You are doomed to failure if you try to place blame on CDC personal, no matter how blatantly wrong they are (were). It is extremely rare for a reviewer to acknowledge that another staff acted improperly, especially if you request that the person be reprimanded. The only exception to this rule is when the reviewer is a rival of the offending staff or there is some inner institution squabbling of staff members against one another. If the reviewer and accused staff member are on the opposite sides of the rivalry, you might win.

Beware! Never tell staff you plan to file a 602. If you do, you may find the staff member has written an informative chrono documenting that you "threatened or coerced him or her" Don't ever threaten to file a 602, just do it. And never let staff know the nature of the issue before submitting a 602. Otherwise you may find they have manipulated the situation or evidence so that you are working from a weakened position.

Research

Before you write and file and 602, read title 15 Cal admin code, the classification manual, and general orders of O.P. of the institution in which you are located. They should be in the law library. Nothing can substitute for this research effort. You will get an excellent understanding of how the institution is operated and will invariably discover rules, regulations and procedures that can help you with many issues.

Rules of regulation shopping

When an appeal issue involves a rule or regulation, read all the rules and regulations that apply. You will find in reading the Title 15 Cal Admin Code/Directors Rules (DR), Classification Manual (CM), and General Orders/Operational procedures, that all are duplications. The CM and GO/OP are primarily just an expansion or clarification of the DR. Frequently, the same rule or regulation will be slightly differently and in comparing these different wordings you may find that one is more supportive of your issue than another. I recently submitted a 602 on a 115. The hearing officer (HO) used two non-confidential memorandums as evidence. I was never given copies or an opportunity to review these memos prior to the hearing when the HO read them aloud. At the conclusion of the hearing I advised the HO it was improper to use these memos as evidence because I was not given copies 2 hours prior to the hearing. (That was a mistake I shouldn't have told him). To counter this flaw the HO wrote in the 115 that the memos were not used as evidence.

Throughout the DR, COM and GO/OP, it states all evidence "relied upon or used, must be given to the prisoner prior to the hearing" without mentioning that it needs to be "relied upon" or used. I quoted this rule and ignored the others. I find it useful to quote, in part, the DR, CM, GO/OP when necessary to illustrate a point. For example: DR NO 3107 says in part (put quotation here). I use only those words directly related to the point I want to emphasize, eliminating unnecessary words and inserting three periods. In some instances, you may want to attach a copy of a page or more of the regulations, but do this only when there is absolutely nothing included which could be used to deny your 602. Do not give them evidence against you.