United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Terre Haute Division
ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND
DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
Jane Magnus-Stinson, Chief Judge
petition of James Maloney for a writ of habeas corpus
challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding identified as No.
ISF 17-04-0103. For the reasons explained in this Entry, Mr.
Maloney's habeas 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
November 30, 2016, Investigator Taylor issued a Report of
Conduct to Mr. Maloney for a violation of Code B-240/212,
conspiracy to commit battery. The Report of Conduct stated:
On March 30th, 2017, an assault occurred in dorm 18S C-Side
Latrine at approx. 1845. When interviewed about the incident,
Offender [James] Maloney [AT] #185182 claims that he did not
witness the fight but did state that the victim, Juan Ramos
#249431 owed money. After reviewing the video footage of the
incident, it is clear that offenders J. Maloney #185182 and
R. Lloyd #257676 enter the latrine at approximately the same
time and remain in the latrine until the victim, Juan Ramos
#249431 enters the latrine. Once offenders Ramos #249431
proceeds to the back of the latrine, offenders J. Maloney
#18518 and Lloyd #2587676 follow quickly behind. Offender
Maloney #185182 then quickly exits the latrine behind a large
number of offenders. Approx. 2 seconds after offender Maloney
#185182 exits the latrine, offender Ramos #249431 is seen
entering the camera view from the back of the latrine and
appears to be disoriented and bleeding. Offender Maloney
#185182 goes to directly to 18SC Cube 1 and talks with
offenders Johnny Taboada-Perez #119115 (18S-42LC), Angel Diaz
#168819 (18S-4LC), Robert Lloyd #2587676 (18S-6LC), and
Christopher Sawyer (#234894) [ ] (18S-7LC). All of the above
offenders  were in the latrine during the time of the
Dkt. 8-1 (capitalization modified from original).
Maloney was provided notice of the offense on April 6, 2017.
Mr. Maloney requested the use of a lay advocate but did not
request any witnesses. Mr. Maloney did request video footage
as physical evidence. The requested video of the incident was
reviewed. The summary states:
On 3.30.17 you Maloney, James #185182 18:45:24 you can be
seen entering the latrine with a couple of offenders. At
approx. 18:45:29 you can be seen walking to the back of the
latrine with several other offender out of camera view. At
approx. 18:46:17 you walk back into camera view with another
offender and follow him to the sink. You continue to stand in
the latrine and walk. At approx. 18:46:41 you can again be
seen walking to the back of the latrine with other offenders
out of camera view. At approx. 18:47:07 you can be seen
walking into the camera view. You walk up to the sink[, ]
touch something and then at approx. 18:47:12 you can be seen
walking out of the latrine. At approx. 18:47:17 an offender
can be seen walking out of the latrine from the back (from
out of camera view) with blood on his face and a torn shirt.
Disciplinary Hearing was held on April 17, 2017. Mr. Maloney
stated, “The write up & video, you're gonna
find us guilty anyway. I had no part of anything[.] 15 people
were in the latrine only interviewed [illegible] and only
wrote up 8. That's crazy. I've got a MH code. I
don't even know what happened.” Dkt. 8-5.
Hearing Officer found Mr. Maloney guilty based on
confidential photos, the video, staff reports, and statement
of offender. The recommended and approved sanctions were a
written reprimand, loss of privileges, 30 days of lost earned
credit time, and imposition of a suspended sentence of 60
days of lost earned credit time. A demotion of one credit
class was recommended, but suspended. The Hearing Officer
imposed the sanctions because of the seriousness and nature
of the offense, the offender's attitude and demeanor
during the hearing, and the likelihood of the sanctions
having a corrective effect on the offender's future
Maloney appealed to Facility Head and the Final Reviewing
Authority, both of which were denied. He then brought this
petition for a writ of ...