From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goudy v. Davis, (N.D.Ind. 2002)

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division
Jul 30, 2002
No. 3:02cv0426 AS (N.D. Ind. Jul. 30, 2002)

Opinion

No. 3:02cv0426 AS

July 30, 2002


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


On June 17, 2002, pro se petitioner, Walter L. Goudy, an inmate at the Wabash Valley Correctional Institution (WVCI) in Carlisle, Indiana, filed a petition seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Response filed on behalf of the respondent by the Attorney General of Indiana on July 19, 2002, demonstrates the necessary compliance with Lewis v. Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100 (7th Cir. 1982). The petitioner filed a Traverse on July 25, 2002, which this Court has carefully examined.

The petitioner is a convicted felon serving a sentence imposed by a court in the State of Indiana. He was previously incarcerated at the Indiana State Prison in Michigan City, Indiana in this district. There, he was the subject of a prison disciplinary proceeding designated ISP 02-02-0370. Apparently, there was the necessary administrative review. The proceedings commenced in February, 2002. He was charged with possessing a scale that could be used to weigh controlled substances. It is important to note that the credit time demotion was suspended, and, therefore, there has been no lengthening of the amount of time this petitioner will spend in prison. This is squarely within Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). Sandin is all that needs to be cited here, and precludes any relief on any other grounds. As an additional and, in the opinion of this Court, unnecessary comment, there has been compliance here with Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974), and the evidence here is sufficient under Superintendent, Mass. Corr. Institution at Walpole v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445 (1985), and under the "some evidence" test applicable in this circuit. See Webb v. Anderson, 224 F.3d 649 (7th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 2000 WL 1512783 (U.S.), McPherson v. McBride, 188 F.3d 784 (7th Cir. 1999), and Meeks v. McBride, 81 F.3d 717 (7th Cir. 1996). However, Sandin makes all of that analysis unnecessary here.

Therefore, the petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is now DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Goudy v. Davis, (N.D.Ind. 2002)

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division
Jul 30, 2002
No. 3:02cv0426 AS (N.D. Ind. Jul. 30, 2002)
Case details for

Goudy v. Davis, (N.D.Ind. 2002)

Case Details

Full title:WALTER L. GOUDY, Petitioner v. CECIL DAVIS, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division

Date published: Jul 30, 2002

Citations

No. 3:02cv0426 AS (N.D. Ind. Jul. 30, 2002)