Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Macy v. Zatecky

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division

June 11, 2018

CHRISTOPHER M. MACY, Petitioner,
v.
DESHAUN ZATECKY, Respondent.

          ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

          Hon. William T. Lawrence Judge

         The petition of Christopher M. Macy for a writ of habeas corpus challenges Indiana prison disciplinary proceeding number ISR 16-11-0014, in which he was disciplined for the unauthorized possession of documents. For the reasons explained in this Entry, Mr. Macy's habeas petition is denied.

         A. Overview

         Prisoners 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 by 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).

         B. The Disciplinary Proceeding

         On October 28, 2016, Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) Officer Wilson of the Pendleton Correctional Facility wrote a Conduct Report charging Mr. Macy with the unauthorized possession of documents, a Class B offense in the IDOC's Adult Disciplinary Process. The Conduct Report provides:

On the above date and time, I C/O Wilson asked offender Macy if he had anything that had to do with state policies . . . and Offender Macy stated he did and went to his bunk area and handed me a paper he stated he had gotten from the law library. I then shook Offender Macy down and found a few more papers about security operations that Counselor Travis [now] has in his possession.

Dkt. No. 8-1.

         Mr. Macy was notified of the charge on November 3, 2016, when he received the Screening Report. Dkt. No. 8-3. He plead not guilty to the charge, requested a lay advocate, indicated he wished to call a witness, and requested certain evidence. Id.

         A hearing was held on November 16, 2016. Mr. Macy's statement at the hearing as “I feel Lagenor should have written me up not Ofc. Wilson.” Dkt. No. 8-7. Based on Mr. Macy's statement, staff reports, and the document confiscated from Mr. Macy, the hearing officer found Mr. Macy guilty of unauthorized possession of documents. The sanction imposed was the loss of earned-credit time.

         An appeal was taken to the Facility Head and the IDOC Final Reviewing Authority; both appeals were denied. Mr. Macy then brought this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

         C. Analysis

         Mr. Macy's petition for habeas corpus seeks relief on four grounds: (1) the wrong IDOC employee wrote the conduct report; (2) the evidence used at the hearing had been altered; (3) the disciplinary hearing was the result of retaliation for having filed a grievance against IDOC administrative personnel; and (4) the incident should ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.