United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND
DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
WALTON PRATT, JUDGE.
matter is before the Court on the Petition for a Writ of
Habeas Corpus filed by David Bott (“Mr. Bott”)
which challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding identified
as No. IYC 17-01-0061. For the reasons explained in this
Entry, Mr. Bott's Petition must be
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 19, 2017, Investigator Feldkamp issued a Report of
Conduct to Bott for a violation of Code B-240/213,
conspiracy/threatening. The Report of Conduct stated:
On 1/19/2017 at approximately 10:30 am I Investigator C.
Feldkamp reviewed offender Bott, David #104979 GTL phone
records. What I discovered in those phone calls is offender
Bott conspiring to commit illegal and unauthorized actions in
accordance with IDOC policy. In one of those communications
offender Bott openly states that he is going to “get
him” when he gets out of prison (meaning that he is
going to assault an individual) and is considered a threat of
harm which supports the 213B Threatening charge. Bott also
ask [sic] for an unauthorized financial transaction to
purchase an item from another offender. Obtaining money in
any manner other than the authorized process is a 220B
Unauthorized Financial Transaction as well as offender Bott
[sic] statement that he is going to purchase an item from
another offender is a 233B violation for Giving and
Receiving. The terminology used by offender Bott is also the
type of communication discovered in the past as being
deceptive and that the communication is actually utilizing
code words. Regardless of what is being communicated in the
conversation offender Bott has violated three Class B IDOC
rules and this writer is seeking aggravated circumstances in
the event that this offender is found guilty and sanctioned.
End of Report.
-1. Mr. Bott was charged with Code B-240 conspiracy and
Code B-213 Threatening. Code B-213 is defined as:
in any of the following:
1. Communicating to another person a plan to physically harm,
harass or intimidate that person or someone else.
2. Communicating a plan to cause damage to or loss of that
person's or another person's property.
3. Communicating a plan to intentionally make an accusation
that he/she knows is untrue or false.
Adult Disciplinary Process, Appendix 1: Offenses, at 5,
Code B-240 is defined as: “Attempting to commit any
Class B offense; aiding commanding, inducing, counseling,
procuring or conspiring with another person to commit any
Class B offense” Id. at 7.
Bott was provided notice of the offense on January 23, 2017.
He did not request any witnesses, but did request telephone