Opinion
3:24-CV-525-TLS-JEM
10-24-2024
KYLE CHANDLER, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER
THERESA L. SPRINGMANN JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Kyle Chandler, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging the prison disciplinary hearing (ISP-24-1-181) at the Indiana State Prison in which a disciplinary hearing officer (DHO) found him guilty of engaging in disruptive behavior in violation of Indiana Department of Correction Offense 236. According to the petition, Chandler was sanctioned with a loss of ninety days earned credit time.
In the pending motion to dismiss, the Warden argues that this case is moot because correctional staff did not sanction Chandler in a manner that affected the duration of his sentence in connection with this disciplinary hearing. The Warden supports this argument with the hearing report and printouts from the departmental inmate database. ECF Nos. 6-3, 6-9. Consequently, the Court finds that the claims raised in the petition are moot. See Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003) (recognizing that 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). Because the claims in the petition are moot, the Court grants the motion and dismisses the habeas petition.
If Chandler wants to appeal this decision, he does not need a certificate of appealability because he is challenging a prison disciplinary proceeding. See Evans v. Circuit Court, 569 F.3d 665, 666 (7th Cir. 2009). However, he may not proceed in forma pauperis on appeal because the Court finds that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) an appeal in this case could not be taken in good faith.
For these reasons, the Court:
(1) GRANTS the motion to dismiss [ECF No. 6];
(2) DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment and to close this case; and
(3) DENIES Kyle Chandler leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
SO ORDERED.