Opinion
CAUSE NO. 3:10-CV-383.
March 16, 2011
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a Petition under 28 U.S.C. Paragraph 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in State Custody filed by Daniel Luttrell, a pro se prisoner, on September 7, 2010, challenging a disciplinary determination at Westville Correctional Center ("WCC") under case number WCC 09-10-0055. (DE #1.) For the reasons set forth below, the petition is DISMISSED AS MOOT.
BACKGROUND
On October 16, 2009, Luttrell was found guilty of engaging in a group demonstration in violation of disciplinary rule B223. (DE #8-1.) Among other sanctions, he lost 15 days of earned credit time. ( Id.) After Luttrell filed this petition asserting that his due process rights were violated in the hearing, the Indiana Department of Correction ("IDOC") final reviewing authority remanded the case for a new hearing before a different disciplinary board. (DE # 8-2.) He directed the board to consider documents, photographs, and other evidence Luttrell wanted reviewed. (DE #8-2.)
DISCUSSION
Based on the final reviewing authority's decision to remand for a new hearing, the respondent moves to dismiss the petition. (DE #7.) More than 60 days have passed since the motion to dismiss was filed, and Luttrell has not filed a response or objection to the motion. Because the case has been remanded for a new hearing, there is at present no disciplinary sanction for this court to review. See Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003) (prisoner can challenge prison disciplinary determination in habeas proceeding only when it lengthened the duration of his confinement). Accordingly, the petition must be dismissed. If Luttrell is dissatisfied with the results of the new hearing, he is free to file a new habeas petition after exhausting his administrative remedies.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, the petition (DE #1) is DISMISSED AS MOOT.