Opinion
No. 3:05cv0364 AS.
November 15, 2005
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On or about June 15, 2005, pro se petitioner, Jeffrey Allen Rowe, an inmate at the Indiana State Prison in Michigan City, Indiana (ISP), 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 October 7, 2005, demonstrates the necessary compliance with Lewis v. Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100 (7th Cir. 1982).
The petitioner is a convicted felon serving a sentence imposed by a court in the State of Indiana. At the time of the filing of this petition he was incarcerated in the ISP in this district. He was the subject of a prison disciplinary proceeding n which he was found guilty of possessing tattooing paraphernalia. The sanction included a 60-day credit time deprivation, which implicates Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974). The proceeding was designated as ISP 05-03-0232. There has been compliance here with the procedural demands of Wolff, 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.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 999 (2000), McPherson v. McBride, 188 F.3d 784 (7th Cir. 1999), and Meeks v. McBride, 81 F.3d 717 (7th Cir. 1996).
The video in question was in fact reviewed by the CAB. The prisoner does not necessarily have a right to review those tapes. See Hoskins v. McBride, 202 F.Supp. 2d 839 (N.D. Ind. 2002). So-called physical evidence is not absolutely necessary at the hearing. See Hays v. McBride, 965 F. Supp. 1186 (N.D. Ind. 1997). This petitioner has not sustained his burden to show an entitlement to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and such petition is now therefore DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.