Jonathan Rodriguez-Ruiz v. Becky Clay


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-30833 Affirmed] Judge: CES, Judge: EBC, Judge: LHS. Mandate pull date is 08/14/2017 [16-30833]

Download PDF
Case: 16-30833 Document: 00514047226 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-30833 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 23, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JONATHAN RODRIGUEZ-RUIZ, Petitioner-Appellant v. BECKY CLAY, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution Oakdale, Respondent-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:16-CV-496 Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and CLEMENT and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jonathan Rodriguez-Ruiz, federal prisoner # 44015-177, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 habeas petition challenging his disciplinary conviction for engaging in or encouraging a group demonstration. He contends that he was not guilty of the infraction because he acted as a translator for the Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 16-30833 Document: 00514047226 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 No. 16-30833 other inmates. Rodriguez-Ruiz also claims that the hearing officer violated his due process rights by denying his request to call witnesses. The incident report constituted sufficient evidence of the offense because it detailed how Rodriguez-Ruiz encouraged other inmates to gather around a prison official. See Hudson v. Johnson, 242 F.3d 534, 536-37 (5th Cir. 2001). The hearing officer report indicates that Rodriguez-Ruiz was informed of his right to call witnesses but did not avail himself of the opportunity and, thus, there was no violation of his due process rights. See Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-70 (1974). AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?