United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ENTRY DISCUSSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
Jane Magnus-Stinson, Chief Judge
petition of Lorezno Bryant for a writ of habeas corpus
challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding identified as No.
CIC16-04-0161. For the reasons explained in this Entry,
Bryant'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
April 10, 2016, Officer Fleming wrote a Report of Conduct in
case CIC 16-04-0161 charging Bryant with Assault on Staff,
offense Al 17. The Report of Conduct states:
At approximately 12:33 AM on 4/10/2016, I, Ofc. T. Fleming
#42, was on the 3 range of E-Unit. While passing Off. Bryant
Lorenzo #202343 3A-3E, Off. Bryant stepped toward and used
his right shoulder and upper arm to hit the right side of my
body, pushing me out of his path. At this time Ofc. K.
Flockhart ordered Off. Bryant to submit to mechanical
restraints and Off. Bryant was escorted to ARH.
April 13, 2016, Bryant was notified of the charge of assault
on staff and served with the Report of Conduct and the Notice
of Disciplinary Hearing "Screening Report". Bryant
was notified of his rights, pled not guilty and requested the
appointment of a lay advocate. He requested two other
offenders as witnesses, and camera footage as physical
hearing officer conducted a disciplinary hearing in CIC
16-04-0161 on May 5, 2016, and found Bryant guilty of the
charge of assault on staff. In making this determination, the
hearing officer considered the video evidence. The hearing
officer recommended and approved the following sanctions: 45
days lost phone privileges, 90 days disciplinary segregation,
a 90 day deprivation of earned credit time, and a demotion
from credit class I to credit class II.
appealed to the Facility Head on May 5, 2016. The Facility
Head denied the appeal on June 7, 2016. Bryant's appeal
to the Appeal Review Officer was denied on June 29, 2016.
Upon further review by the Appeal Review Officer, the charge
in Bryant's disciplinary conviction was reduced from the
class A offense of Assault on Staff to the class B offense of
Assault and Battery.
seeks a writ of habeas corpus arguing that merely bumped into
the officer and did not assault him and that there was no
serious bodily injury warranting the conviction for a Class A
appeal within the facility, Bryant's charge was reduced
from A117 Assault on Staff, which occurs when an inmate
commits and assault or battery on a staff person resulting in
bodily injury, to B212 Assault and Battery, which occurs when
an inmate commits and assault or battery that does not result
in bodily injury. Because the charge was reduced to a charge
that does not require injury to the victim, the argument that
his actions did not cause injury is moot. In addition, there
was no due process error in modifying the charge on appeal
within the facility. Northern v. Hanks, 326 F.3d
909, 910 (7th Cir. 2003). The loss of credit time and
reduction in credit class ...