United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND
DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
William T. Lawrence, Judge
petition of Dominuque Troutman for a writ of habeas corpus
challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding identified as No.
IYC 16-01-0174. For the reasons explained in this Entry, Mr.
Troutman's habeas petition must be denied.
in Indiana custody may not be deprived of good-time credits,
Cochran v. Buss, 381 F.3d 637, 639 (7th Cir. 2004)
(per curiam), or of credit-earning class, Montgomery v.
Anderson, 262 F.3d 641, 644-45 (7th Cir. 2001), without
due process. The due process requirement is satisfied with
the issuance of advance written notice of the charges, a
limited opportunity to present evidence to an impartial
decision-maker, a written statement articulating the reasons
for the disciplinary action and the evidence justifying it,
and “some evidence in the record” to support the
finding of guilt. Superintendent, Mass. Corr. Inst. v.
Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 454 (1985); Wolff v.
McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 570-71 (1974); Piggie v.
Cotton, 344 F.3d 674, 677 (7th Cir. 2003); Webb v.
Anderson, 224 F.3d 649, 652 (7th Cir. 2000).
The Disciplinary Proceeding
January 14, 2016, Officer Feldkamp wrote a Conduct Report
charging Mr. Troutman with assault and battery in violation
of Code B-212. The Conduct Report states:
On November 24, 2015, at approximately 6:22 PM an incident
took place in Central Unit cell N-10. Officer reported
approaching that cell because of multiple offenders entering
the room. Once the staff arrived at cell N-10 they discovered
an offender that was assigned to that cell with injuries
consistent with being assaulted. Offender Dominique Troutman
#161981 was identified using facility video as one the
offenders in the cell at the time that this offender was
assaulted in N-10. See report of investigation.
Dkt. 9-1 at 1.
Report of Investigation referenced in the Conduct Report
On December 12, 2015 I Investigator C. Feldkamp was assigned
to investigate a situation that originated on November 24,
2015 at approximately 6:22 PM in Housing Unit Central cell
N-10. During that incident an offender who was assigned to
cell N-10L was assaulted while he was on his bunk in his
cell. Prior to the incident as observed on facility video
offender Dominique Troutman #161981, Michael Earls #148396,
Kenneth Doss #219666 and Robert Peterson #249596 were
observed entering the cell. None of those offenders were
assigned to that cell. Th[is] drew the attention of
offender[s] in HUC that were not in cell N-10 and a crowd
began to gather. Staff on site noticed the group of offenders
and approached cell N-10. As the offenders began to disperse
from the area staff discovered the offender in cell N-10 had
been assaulted and called for assistance. Offenders Troutman,
Earls, Doss and Peterson were clearly observed and identified
as the offenders that were present in cell N-10 during the
time of the assault. During interviews concerning this
incident none of these offenders would admit to assaulting
this offender but do not deny being present during the
assault. Confidential video, audio and case file are being
maintained in the Investigations office and are available for
Dkt. 9-2 at 1.
Troutman was notified of the charge on January 24, 2016, when
he received the Screening Report. He plead not guilty to the
charge, requested a lay advocate, requested as witnesses
inmates Michael Earls and Kenneth Doss, and requested to view
the report of investigation. Both Mr. Earls and Mr. Doss
provided witness statements, and a summary of the video
evidence was also provided.
hearing was held on February 2, 2016. The hearing officer
changed the charge from assault and battery to
aiding/abetting/conspiring to commit assault and battery. Mr.
Troutman stated that he was not guilty; he was trying to
diffuse the situation between Mr. Earls and Mr. Barnett and
was unable to intervene before Mr. Earls assaulted Mr.
Barnett. After reviewing Mr. Troutman's statement, the
staff reports, the witness statements, the video review, the
report of investigation, and the other confidential
materials, the hearing officer found Mr. Troutman guilty. The
hearing officer recommended and approved sanctions including
a thirty-day earned-credit-time deprivation and a credit
Troutman appealed to Facility Head and then the IDOC Final
Reviewing Authority, but both of his appeals were denied. He
then brought this petition for a writ ...