Opinion
NO. 2012-CA-000518-MR
02-08-2013
DAYMA MARTINEZ APPELLANT v. CHRISTINA DOUGLAS APPELLEE
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Dayma Martinez, pro se Fredonia, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Charles D. Aaron, Jr. Justice & Public Safety Cabinet Frankfort, Kentucky
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL FROM LYON CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE CLARENCE A. WOODALL, III, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 12-CI-00009
OPINION
AFFIRMING
BEFORE: CLAYTON, STUMBO AND THOMPSON, JUDGES. CLAYTON, JUDGE: This is an appeal from a decision of the Lyon Circuit Court dismissing the appellant, Dayma Martinez's, appeal of a prison disciplinary proceeding against her. Based upon the following, we affirm the decision of the Lyon Circuit Court.
Martinez was charged with "Inappropriate Sexual Behavior with Another Person," a Category VI, Item 12, institutional infraction. She received twenty (20) days of disciplinary segregation as punishment for this infraction. Martinez then filed an appeal with her warden, but the warden agreed with the decision of the Adjustment Committee.
Martinez then filed a declaration of rights action with the Lyon Circuit Court. She requested that the court expunge her charge, amend it to a lesser infraction or a more fitting charge, and that the days she served on the incorrect charge be credited to any lesser charge that might be assessed.
The circuit court dismissed the case based upon issue preclusion, holding as follows:
On September 16, 2011, this Court entered a decision, under Case No. 11-CI- 00123 that decided the very issue in this instant case. That issue, arising from the same nucleus of facts, was whether [Martinez] received due process in the Adjustment Committee's January 12, 2011 decision. This Court determines that the Respondents or in this case, those in privity with the Respondents, followed limited due process, and this determination was necessary to the judgment in Case No. 11-CI-00123.Martinez then brought this appeal.
As set forth by the circuit court, for issue preclusion to be applicable, the following four thresholds must be met:
1. The issue in the second case must be the same as the issue in the first;
2. The issue must have been actually decided in the first action;
3. If an issue was actually litigated, it must have been actually decided in the prior action; and
4. The decision on the issue in the prior action must have been necessary to the court's judgment.
In the original case on September 16, 2011, the circuit court entered a decision in the case. It arose from the same disciplinary proceeding that is currently the subject of this appeal and it was necessary to the judgment. Thus, the declaration of rights in this action was precluded by the findings in the September, 2011 case. The circuit court, therefore, correctly dismissed Martinez's action.
Accordingly, the judgment of the Lyon Circuit Court is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR. BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Dayma Martinez, pro se
Fredonia, Kentucky
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Charles D. Aaron, Jr.
Justice & Public Safety Cabinet
Frankfort, Kentucky