United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND
DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
R. SWEENEY II, JUDGE.
Scales' petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenges
his conviction in a prison disciplinary proceeding identified
as NCF 18-09-0088. For the reasons explained in this Entry,
Mr. Scales' petition must be denied.
in Indiana custody may not be deprived of good-time credits
or of credit-earning class without due process. Ellison
v. Zatecky, 820 F.3d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 2016);
Scruggs v. Jordan, 485 F.3d 934, 939 (7th Cir.
2007); see also Rhoiney v. Neal, 723 Fed.Appx. 347,
348 (7th Cir. 2018). The due process requirement is satisfied
with: 1) the issuance of at least 24 hours advance written
notice of the charge; 2) a limited opportunity to call
witnesses and present evidence to an impartial
decision-maker; 3) a written statement articulating the
reasons for the disciplinary action and the evidence
justifying it; and 4) “some evidence in the
record” to support the finding of guilt.
Superintendent, Mass. Corr. Inst. v. Hill, 472 U.S.
445, 454 (1985); see also Wolff v. McDonnell, 418
U.S. 539, 563-67 (1974).
The Disciplinary Proceeding
18-09-0088 began with a conduct report by Investigator
Barnham on September 14, 2018. Dkt. 7-1. The report states,
in relevant part:
A conversation occurred between inmate Scales and a former
NCCF female Correctional Officer, via the GTL phone system,
he told her if she files a complaint that people will talk
shit and guess what I still have a year and a half left in
this bitch and if you want to do that it will cause trouble.
The Co's are going to start flipping out and if they want
to run their cocksuckers, I will beat up a CO. This place is
petty as fuck.
September 24, 2018, Mr. Scales received a screening report
notifying him that he had been charged with violating Code
213, “Threatening.” Dkt. 7-2. Mr. Scales
requested to review video of the incident, but that request
was denied on grounds that the phone call was not captured on
18-09-0088 proceeded to a hearing on September 26, 2018. Dkt.
7-4. According to the hearing officer's report, Mr.
Scales admitted to making the statements alleged in the
conduct report, but he disputed that they were threats
Id. Mr. Scales stated that he was
“venting” and that he “would not touch a
C.O.” Id. Nevertheless, after considering the
conduct report, Mr. Scales' statement, and a recording of
the phone call, the hearing officer found Mr. Scales guilty.
Id. The hearing officer explained:
Based on cond. report, evidence and offender statement
conversation is in the cond. report. I have heard the phone
- Guilty -
hearing officer assessed sanctions, including rescinding 45
days' earned credit time that had previously been
restored. Id.; dkt. 7-5. Mr. ...