28 C.F.R. § 540.44

Regular visitors

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

An inmate desiring to have regular visitors must submit a list of proposed visitors to the designated staff. See § 540.45 for qualification as special visitor. Staff are to compile a visiting list for each inmate after suitable investigation in accordance with § 540.51(b) of this part. The list may include:

(a) Members of the immediate family. These persons include mother, father, step-parents, foster parents, brothers and sisters, spouse, and children. These individuals are placed on the visiting list, absent strong circumstances which preclude visiting.

(b) Other relatives. These persons include grandparents, uncles, aunts, in-laws, and cousins. They may be placed on the approved list if the inmate wishes to have visits from them regularly and if there exists no reason to exclude them.

(c) Friends and associates. The visiting privilege ordinarily will be extended to friends and associates having an established relationship with the inmate prior to confinement, unless such visits could reasonably create a threat to the security and good order of the institution. Exceptions to the prior relationship rule may be made, particularly for inmates without other visitors, when it is shown that the proposed visitor is reliable and poses no threat to the security or good order of the institution.

(d) Persons with prior criminal convictions. The existence of a criminal conviction alone does not preclude visits. Staff shall give consideration to the nature, extent and recentness of convictions, as weighed against the security considerations of the institution. Specific approval of the Warden may be required before such visits take place.

(e) Children under sixteen. Children under the age of 16 may not visit unless accompanied by a responsible adult. Children shall be kept under supervision of a responsible adult or a children's program. Exceptions in unusual circumstances may be made by special approval of the Warden.

[45 FR 44232, June 30, 1980, as amended at 56 FR 4159, Feb. 1, 1991; 68 FR 10658, Mar. 6, 2003]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2024 · leading case: Akers v. McGinnis, 352 F.3d 1030 (6th Cir. 2003).
Akers v. McGinnis, 352 F.3d 1030 (6th Cir. 2003). · cites it 2× “Thus, the MDOC has not based visitor is reliable and poses no threat to the security or its prohibition against relationships with family members or good order of the institution.”
Agofsky v. Bureau of Prisons (S.D. Ind. 2024). · cites it 13× “See 28 C.F.R. § 540.44 . That regulation provides that "immediate family," including a spouse, "are placed on the visiting list, absent strong circumstances which preclude visiting.”
Troya v. Revell (S.D. Ind. 2019). · cites it 4× “” 28 C.F.R. § 540.44 (c). This requirement is referred to as the “prior relationship requirement.”
Agofsky v. Bureau of Prisons (D.D.C. 2024). · cites it 2× “at 1, 5–7; compare 28 C.F.R. § 540.44 (a) (directing BOP staff “to compile a visiting list for each inmate after suitable investigation” which may include “members of the immediate family,” including an inmate’s spouse, who are to be placed on the list “absent strong…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.