United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ABIGAIL T. ROM, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND
DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
William T. Lawrence, United States District Court Judge
petition of Ramar Daniels for a writ of habeas corpus
challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding identified as No.
CIC 16-09-0009. For the reasons explained in this Entry, Mr.
Daniels'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
August 31, 2016, Investigator Poer issued a conduct report to
Mr. Daniels for a violation of Code B-240/215, conspiracy to
commit theft. Dkt. No. 13-1. The conduct report stated:
On July 26, 2016, offender Daniels, Ramar 104542 33L-3ARH was
involved in an assault involving multiple offenders on the E
1/3 side. An investigation was conducted to determine the
cause of the assault and identify who participated in the
assault. At 8:42 PM offender Daniels exited cell 5-1E with
two other offenders, one of which was in possession of
offender Mangold's flat screen TV. Refer to Confidential
Case File 16-CIC-0033 for additional details.
Daniels was notified that the offense would be reheard on
April 26, 2017. Dkt. No. 13-2. Mr. Daniels sought assistance
of a lay advocate, requested witness statements from Jamar
Mason and Joseph Mangold, and requested physical evidence
including the confidential case file and video evidence.
Jamar Mason provided a witness statement in response to the
question, “Was [Mr. Daniels] part of any conspiracy to
steal the T.V.?” Mr. Mason stated, “NO He was not
in the room. He didn't steal a TV.” Inmate Joseph
Mangold provided a witness statement in response to the
question, “Did [Mr. Daniels] help anyone take a
TV?” Mr. Mangold stated, “No.” Dkt. No.
camera footage was reviewed and summarized:
I, UTM J. Hunt, reviewed the video footage for case number:
CIC 16-09-0009. The video showed Offender Daniels, Ramar
#104542 standing outside of cell 5-1E with 2 other offenders.
Offender Daniels along with the other 2 offenders entered
cell 5-1E. All three offenders eventually emerged from room
5-1E after what appeared to be an altercation with an
additional offender. Offender Daniels does not appear to be
carrying anything out of the cell with him at the time.
disciplinary rehearing was held on May 8, 2017. Dkt. No.