United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Terre Haute Division
BRYAN T. GADSON, Petitioner,
SUPERINTENDENT,  Respondent.
Abigail Recker INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL
ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND
DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
William T. Lawrence, Judge United States District Court.
petition of Bryan T. Gadson for a writ of habeas corpus
challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding identified as No.
WVS 17-09-0011. For the reasons explained in this Entry, Mr.
Gadson'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
September 16, 2017, Mr. Gadson was charged with offense
B-213, threatening, in No. WVS 17-09-0011:
On 9-16-2017 at approx. 7:10 am I C/O Martinez along with C/O
Manley were running outside rec on A 1200 range. We arrived
at cell A 1204 which Offender Gadson, Bryan resides. C/O
Manley and I informed offender Gadson #989830 that his rec
was cancelled due to impairment of surveillance because his
cell door and light was covered. When walking away from
Offender Gadson's cell, he began to shout. Offender
Gadson stated “I want you mother fuckers to come in
this cell and I will beat both your asses.” C/O Manley
and myself continued to escort offenders from that range as
Gadson was saying “I got something for your
Dkt. No. 10-1.
September 18, 2017, Mr. Gadson was served with a copy of the
conduct and screening reports. Dkt. Nos. 10-1 & 10-2. Mr.
Gadson was advised of his rights and pleaded not guilty. He
requested a lay advocate, and one was later appointed to him.
Dkt. No. 10-3. He did not request any witnesses or physical
evidence at his screening, but later requested video
evidence. Dkt. No. 10-4.
September 29, 2017, the disciplinary hearing officer held a
hearing. Mr. Gadson pleaded not guilty and provided the
following statement: “They never came to my cell to
tell me anything - the video summary says 65639 there [sic]
report says 710AM.” Dkt. No. 10-6. After considering
staff reports, Mr. Gadson's statement, witness
statements, and the video review, the hearing officer found
Mr. Gadson guilty of offense B-213, threatening. Mr.
Gadson's sanctions included the loss of 60 days earned
credit time and one credit class demotion.
Gadson appealed to the facility head and the Indiana
Department of Correction (“IDOC”) final reviewing
authority, and both appeals were denied. He then brought this
petition for and writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
Gadson raises seven grounds for relief in his petition: 1)
the time recorded on the incident report was incorrect; 2)
the hearing was not conducted in seven business days; 3) a
witness statement was not filed on the proper state form; 4)
there was no lay advocate state form #35447 filed per policy;
5) he was not given the ability to select the lay advocate
from the approved list; 6) he was not provided video ...