decided: September 3, 1985.
AHMAD ABDUL JABBAR AL SAMAD, A/K/A ROY WILLIAMS, PETITIONER
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS, COMMISSIONER RONALD J. MARKS ET AL., RESPONDENTS
Appeal in case of Ahmad Abdul Jabbar Al Samad, a/k/a Roy Williams v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Bureau of Corrections, Commissioner Ronald J. Marks et al.
Ahmad Abdul Jabbar Al Samad a/k/a Roy Williams, petitioner, for himself.
David M. Donaldson, Deputy Attorney General, with him, LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, for respondents.
President Judge Crumlish, Jr., Judge Colins, and Senior Judge Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by President Judge Crumlish, Jr.
[ 93 Pa. Commw. Page 146]
Ahmad Abdul Jabbar Al Samad, a/k/a Roy Williams (Williams), appeals a decision issued by the
[ 93 Pa. Commw. Page 147]
Commissioner of the Bureau of Corrections rejecting his grievance regarding visitation procedures at the State Correctional Institution at Graterford.*fn1 We dismiss Williams' appeal.
Williams, a Graterford inmate, objected to delays in the commencement of visits, and the resulting shortening of visiting times to less than one hour, caused by the holding back of visitors until completion of the afternoon change in the guard shift. He also complained of the requirement that his minor son produce identification when visiting him.
The Bureau argues that the Commissioner's decision is not an adjudication subject to appellate review, claiming that it did not implicate any rights or privileges.*fn2 We agree. Bureau regulations grant inmates the privilege of receiving visitors, particularly immediate family members.*fn3 However, the same regulations specifically limit this privilege in the areas relating to Williams' grievance. They merely provide that visiting periods " should be no less than 1 hour in duration." 37 Pa. Code § 93.3(h)(3) (emphasis added). Likewise, "a visitor who cannot produce identification . . . will not be allowed in the institution." 37 Pa. Code § 93.3(i)(3). Lawful incarceration results in the necessary limitation of many rights and privileges. Robson v. Beister, 53 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 587, 420 A.2d 9 (1980). The Commissioner's
[ 93 Pa. Commw. Page 148]
decision does not implicate any of Williams' limited visiting privileges. We hold that this decision is not an adjudication and, therefore, that appellate review is not proper. Salvucci v. Secretary of Commerce, 81 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 361, 473 A.2d 1107 (1984).
We accordingly dismiss Williams' petition for review.*fn4
The petition for review of Ahmad Abdul Jabbar Al Samad, a/k/a Roy Williams, is dismissed.