Unfortunately many feel that appellate rulings don't always benefit modern correctional institutions. As mentioned previous, while prisoners are afforded more rights, many institutions now have stricter standards that have in part contributed to overcrowding. Many have described today's appellate rulings as inconsistent as best, "contributing rather than reducing disparity" and crippling state's abilities to prosecute as needed (Duke, 2005).

Some good has come out of appellate rulings however. Devries (2004) points out that recent appellate rulings have also changed the way medical expert testimony is handled in court. Citing the case of Jennings v. Palomar Pomerado Health Systems, 114 Cal. App. 4th 1108, he points out that the courts have ruled that medical 'expert testimony' does not give an individual the ability to make assumptions or conclusions not supported by facts or supported by conjecture only (Devries, 2004). Thus any evidence that is not supported with solid evidence must be excluded from testimony or consideration (Devries, 2004). This is just an example of one additional way rulings are...

"Corrections in context: Policy options for control of intake, length of stay and system capacity in West Virginia." 1991. Department of Sociology and Anthropology, WVU. 21, Sept. 2005: http://www.polsci.wvu.edu/ipa/mono/html/mono3.html
Devries, Scott P. "Listen to the experts? Recent appellate rulings affect admissibility of medical-expert testimony." June 2004. FindLaw. 21, Sept. 2005: http://library.findlaw.com/2004/Jun/22/133474.html

Duke Law. "Nancy King discusses waiver and the future of sentencing policy." Duke

Law Magazine, 23.1 (2005-Spring): 1

Iowa Department of Corrections. "Iowa DOC 2005 strategic plan." 2004 - Dec. Iowa

DOC. 21, Sept 2005: http://www.dom.state.ia.us/planning_performance/plans/strategic/Corrections.doc

Oakhill Correctional Institution." 22, Sept. 2005: http://www.wi-doc.com/oakhill.htm