Filed: Jul. 31, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 31, 2019
Summary: OPINION and ORDER JAMES T. MOODY , District Judge . Jerome D. Robertson, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his prison disciplinary hearing in NCN 18-03-113 where a Disciplinary Hearing Officer (DHO) at the New Castle Correctional Facility found him guilty of being a habitual conduct rule violator in contravention of B-200 on April 5, 2018. (DE # 1 at 1.) As a result, Robertson was sanctioned with the loss of 90 days earned credit time and a one-step de
Summary: OPINION and ORDER JAMES T. MOODY , District Judge . Jerome D. Robertson, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his prison disciplinary hearing in NCN 18-03-113 where a Disciplinary Hearing Officer (DHO) at the New Castle Correctional Facility found him guilty of being a habitual conduct rule violator in contravention of B-200 on April 5, 2018. (DE # 1 at 1.) As a result, Robertson was sanctioned with the loss of 90 days earned credit time and a one-step dem..
More
OPINION and ORDER
JAMES T. MOODY, District Judge.
Jerome D. Robertson, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his prison disciplinary hearing in NCN 18-03-113 where a Disciplinary Hearing Officer (DHO) at the New Castle Correctional Facility found him guilty of being a habitual conduct rule violator in contravention of B-200 on April 5, 2018. (DE # 1 at 1.) As a result, Robertson was sanctioned with the loss of 90 days earned credit time and a one-step demotion in credit class. (Id.)
After Robertson filed his petition, the Warden filed a motion to dismiss (DE # 21) and memorandum in support of the motion (DE # 22) on the basis that the Indiana Department of Correction vacated the finding of guilt and sanctions, and dismissed the disciplinary hearing challenged in Robertson's petition.1 (DE ## 21; 22.) Robertson objected to the motion to dismiss, asserting that the Warden had not vacated the guilty finding and restored his 90 days of earned credit time he lost. (DE ## 23 at 2; 23-1 at 3.) In light of Robertson's objection, the court ordered the Warden to file a reply to the motion to dismiss, including appropriate prison records, clarifying whether Robertson's earned credit time had been returned to him and whether Robertson's demotion to Credit Class D had been reversed. (DE # 24.)
On July 19, 2019, the Warden filed a reply, along with prison records from the Offender Information System (OIS) which shows that Robertson's guilty finding has been vacated, his earned credit time has been restored, and his demotion to Credit Class D has been reversed. (DE ## 29-1 at 1; 29-4 at 24; 29-5 at 3-4, 6, 9.) Because the challenged disciplinary proceeding and sanctions have been vacated by the Indiana Department of Correction, this case is now moot and must be dismissed. See Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003) (a prisoner can challenge a prison disciplinary determination in a habeas proceeding only when it resulted in a sanction that lengthened the duration of his confinement).
For these reasons, the Warden's motion to dismiss (DE # 21) is GRANTED and the case is DISMISSED. Furthermore, Robertson's motions objecting to the dismissal of this case (DE ## 17, 25, 27) are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close this case.
SO ORDERED.
