STEWART (WILLIE JAMES) VS. THOMPSON (LADONNA), ET AL.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
RENDERED: APRIL 8, 2011; 10:00 A.M.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Commonwealth of Kentucky
Court of Appeals
NO. 2010-CA-000519-MR
WILLIE JAMES STEWART
v.
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE PHILLIP J. SHEPHERD, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 09-CI-01363
LADONNA THOMPSON;
STEVE HANEY; AND
BECKY W. PANCAKE
APPELLEES
OPINION
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE: TAYLOR, CHIEF JUDGE; ACREE AND COMBS, JUDGES.
TAYLOR, CHIEF JUDGE: Willie James Stewart brings this appeal from a
February 9, 2010, Order of the Franklin Circuit Court dismissing Stewart’s petition
for declaration of rights against LaDonna H. Thompson, Commissioner of the
Department of Corrections, Steve Haney, Warden, and Becky W. Pancake, Warden
(collectively referred to as appellees). We affirm.
On September 2, 2009, Stewart filed a petition for declaration of
rights in the Franklin Circuit Court alleging that his constitutional rights were
violated while he was incarcerated at Northpoint Training Facility. Specifically,
Stewart alleged that $200 that he had received from a family member and
deposited into his inmate financial account was improperly seized by Northpoint
prison to repay the cost of previous copies and other litigation expenses incurred
by him. Appellees subsequently filed a motion to dismiss Stewart’s complaint.
The Franklin Circuit Court granted appellees’ motion to dismiss and dismissed
Stewart’s action by order entered February 9, 2010. This appeal follows.
Stewart contends that the circuit court erred by dismissing his petition
for declaration of rights. Stewart specifically asserts that as an “indigent inmate,”
he was entitled to free legal supplies, postage, and copies per Kentucky
Corrections Policy and Procedure (CPP) 15.7. Stewart asserts that Northpoint
prison officials violated CPP 15.7 by requiring him to pay for the costs of copies.
We begin our analysis with a review of two relevant Corrections’
policies. CPP 14.4, entitled “Legal Services Program,” provides in relevant part:
E. Upon request, an indigent may receive reasonable
amounts of legal supplies, postage and copying
services as necessary.
F. An inmate who can demonstrate by court order or
court rules a definite deadline shall be allowed to have
copies and postage upon signing a cash pay order
-2-
(CPO) even if their cash accounts are inadequate to
pay the expense.
CPP 14.4(E) clearly states that inmates may receive reasonable amounts of
legal supplies, postage, and copying services. Subsection (F) provides that such
copies and postage shall be provided to an inmate who is under a deadline pursuant
to court rule, regardless of whether the inmate has adequate funds to cover the
expense. CPP 14.4 does not address whether such amount will be charged to the
inmate’s account; rather, it merely states that under certain circumstances copies
and postage shall be provided.
CPP 15.7 is entitled “Inmate Account Restriction” and addresses the policy
and procedure to be followed for handling an inmate’s personal financial account.
In relevant part, CPP 15.7 provides:1
If an inmate owes restitution as well as other
charges for legal postage, copy work, medical co-pays, or
other expenses, incoming funds to the inmate’s account
shall be fully applied to any outstanding authorizations.
(Emphasis added.)
CPP 15.7 clearly contemplates that an inmate may incur charges for legal postage,
copy costs, or other expenses when the funds in his inmate account are insufficient
to cover the costs incurred. Under CPP 15.7, funds that are deposited into the
inmate’s account after such costs have been incurred “shall be fully applied to any
outstanding authorizations.” When taken together, CPP 14.4 and CPP 15.7 clearly
provide that an indigent inmate may receive reasonable amounts of legal supplies,
1
This is the version of Corrections Polices & Procedures 15.7 in effect in January 2009, when
the $200 was deposited into Willie James Stewart’s inmate account.
-3-
postage and copying. Moreover, if the inmate’s account has funds deposited
therein after legal expenses have been incurred, such funds may be applied to
repay the Department of Corrections. And, regardless of the inmate’s account
balance, an inmate shall be provided copies and postage if under a definitive court
deadline. The record in this case reflects that the appellees followed applicable
policies of the Department of Corrections and there otherwise exists no legal basis
or controversy to support a petition for declaration of rights in this action.
Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 418.040; KRS 418.045 As such, we do not
believe the circuit court erred by dismissing Stewart’s action for declaration of
rights.
For the foregoing reasons, the Order of the Franklin Circuit Court is
affirmed.
ALL CONCUR.
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:
Willie James Stewart, Pro Se
St. Mary, Kentucky
Wesley W. Duke
Department of Corrections
Frankfort, Kentucky
-4-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.