28 C.F.R. § 543.13

Visits by attorneys

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

(a) The Warden shall, under the conditions of this section, permit visits by the retained, appointed, or prospective attorney of an inmate or by an attorney who wishes to interview an inmate as a witness.

(b) The Warden generally may not limit the frequency of attorney visits since the number of visits necessary is dependent upon the nature and urgency of the legal problems involved. The Warden shall set the time and place for visits, which ordinarily take place during regular visiting hours. Attorney visits shall take place in a private conference room, if available, or in a regular visiting room in an area and at a time designed to allow a degree of privacy. The Warden may make exceptions according to local conditions or for an emergency situation demonstrated by the inmate or visiting attorney.

(c) For Bureau institutions that do not house pretrial detainees and unsentenced individuals, the attorney shall make an advance appointment for the visit through the Warden prior to each visit. However, the Warden shall make every effort to arrange for a visit when prior notification is not practicable. Bureau institutions that house pretrial detainees and unsentenced individuals will allow scheduled and unscheduled attorney visits during designated attorney visitation hours.

(d) The Warden may require an attorney to indicate where he is licensed as an attorney and how that fact may be verified. Prior to each appointment or visit, the Warden shall require each attorney to identify himself and to confirm that he wishes to visit an inmate who has requested his visit or whom he represents or whom he wishes to interview as a witness. The Warden may not ask the attorney to state the subject matter of the law suit or interview. If there is any question about the identity of the visitor or his qualification as an attorney in good standing, the Warden shall refer the matter to the Regional Counsel.

(e) Staff shall not subject visits between an attorney and an inmate to auditory supervision. The Warden may permit tape recordings to be used by an attorney during the course of a visit only if the attorney states in writing in advance of the interview that the sole purpose of the recording is to facilitate the attorney-client or attorney-witness relationship.

(f) The Warden may, at any time, subject an attorney to a search of his person and belongings for the purpose of ascertaining if contraband is present, as a condition of visiting an inmate.

[44 FR 38263, June 29, 1979, as amended at 89 FR 8332, Feb. 7, 2024 ]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2025 · leading case: Fed. Defenders of New York, Inc. v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 954 F.3d 118 (2d Cir. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Fed. Defenders of New York, Inc. v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 954 F.3d 118 (2d Cir. 2020). · cites it 4× “28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (b). In doing so, he must “provide the opportunity for pretrial inmate-attorney visits on a seven-days-a-week basis,” id.”

Lonegan v. Hasty, 436 F. Supp. 2d 419 (E.D.N.Y 2006). · cites it 5× “A regulation promulgated by the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”), codified at 28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (e), which was in effect during the time period at issue and remains in effect at present, prohibits auditory monitoring of attorney-client meetings at federal prisons.”

Nadine Pellegrino v. TSA, 937 F.3d 164 (3rd Cir. 2019). “290 , prison visitor entrances, 28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (f), chemical facilities, 6 C.”

Turkmen v. Ashcroft, 915 F. Supp. 2d 314 (E.D.N.Y 2013). · cites it 2× “” 28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (b) (emphasis added). The regulation permits the warden to “set the time and place for visits” and to “make exceptions according to local conditions or for an emergency situation demonstrated by the inmate or visiting attorney.”

Sturm v. Clark, 835 F.2d 1009 (3rd Cir. 1987). · cites it 3× “28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (b), (c). Yet, it did not do so here.”

Gennusa v. Shoar, 879 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (M.D. Fla. 2012). “25, 2010) (citing 28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (e)). Although the law governing federal prisons is not applicable here, it further demonstrates that society has recognized the need for confidential attorney-client communications in the prison and police station context.”

Depew v. Hawk, 20 F. Supp. 2d 132 (D. Mass. 1998). “Upon receiving the second letter, prison officials opened it and suspended Attorney Dahl’s legal correspondence privileges for one year pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 543.13 . I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed his complaint in this action on January 16, 1998 and simultaneously…”

(PC) Head v. Cnty. of Sacramento (E.D. Cal. 2020). “See 28 C.F.R. §§ 543.13 (e), 501.3(d). Here, 21 Plaintiff claims his calls were recorded while he was in custody and Shelton disclosed his 22 attorney-client privileged phone calls to Endrizzi.”

Thompson v. Doe 1 (S.D. Ill. 2023). “” 28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (c). After investigation, the BOP’s Regional Counsel, or his or her designee, will issue a decision.”

Huffman v. The Davey Tree Expert Co. (S.D. Ga. 2025). “See 28 C.F.R. § 543.13 (a) (“The Warden shall .”

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.