How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ely Your Own Question
Ely, Counselor at Law
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 99417
Experience:  Private practice with focus on family, criminal, PI, consumer protection, and business consultation.
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
Ely is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds


Customer Question

My brother is currently incarcerated in the Texas state prison system. He filed a grievance claiming that a female officer was present while he was taking a shower and reported him for a lewd act, which he claims is not true. He believes that it is against federal law for a female officer to be present while a male inmate is nude taking a shower. Is this true?
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  Ely replied 4 years ago.
Hello, my name is Ely. I am here to help you. There may be a slight delay between your follow ups and my replies as I type out a reply. Please note: (1) this is general information only, not legal advice; and (2) my function is to give you honest information and not to tell you what you necessarily wish to hear.

I am very sorry for your brother's situation. Notwithstanding the matter underlining the situation, it is not against federal law for a female officer to be present while a male inmate is taking a shower, depsite several attempts to have the Court rule it as so under 42 U.S.C. §1983 (Civil action for deprivation of rights).

In Grummett v. Rushen, prison inmates brought a class action alleging that the prison's policy of allowing female guards to view male inmates in states of partial or total nudity while dressing, showering, being strip searched, or using toilet facilities violated the inmates' privacy rights. The Court said that even though the policy created possibilities for infringement of rights, because the viewing itself was infrequent, the policy is allowed. Grummet v. Rushen, 779 F.2d 491 (9th Cir. 1985).

The discussion is by no means over, but at this point, this policy is still allowed.

Surely, you prefer that I tell the truth rather than what you wish to hear. Because I do not get credit unless you press one of the top three faces, keep this in mind when rating my answer and please do not punish me for being honest. I understand that this may not be easy to hear, and I empathize.

IMPORTANT INFO: I hope this finds you well. Please use REPLY TO EXPERT to keep talking, or RATE my answer when we are finished. Kindly rate my answer as one of the top three faces and then SUBMIT, because this is how I get credit for my time with you. Rating my answer the bottom two faces does not give me credit and reflects negatively on me as an expert even if my answer is correct. I work very hard to formulate an informative and honest answer for you; please reciprocate my good faith. Do not worry, you may always ask follow ups free after rating.

Related Criminal Law Questions