Lamont Gentry Falls v. Dwight L. Fondren



Download PDF
Lamont Gentry Falls v. Dwight L. Fondren Doc. 0 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 10-2679 ___________ Lamont Gentry Falls, Appellant, v. Dwight L. Fondren, Appellee. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: March 7, 2011 Filed: March 8, 2011 ___________ Before MELLOY, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Federal inmate Lamont Gentry Falls appeals from the district court's1 denial of his 28 U.S.C. 2241 petition, in which he challenged disciplinary proceedings that ultimately resulted in, among other things, a loss of good conduct time. Upon careful de novo review, see Mitchell v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 538 F.3d 948, 951 (8th Cir. 2008) (per curiam), we agree with the district court that Falls was adequately afforded due process in the disciplinary proceedings, and we agree with the conclusion that the The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. 1 Appellate Case: 10-2679 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/08/2011 Entry ID: 3763782 disciplinary decision was supported by the evidence. See, e.g., Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455-56 (1985) (requirements of due process are satisfied if "some evidence" supports disciplinary decision to revoke good time credits).2 Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ We decline to consider Falls's newly raised claim regarding evidence allegedly withheld from him. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004) (claims not presented in district court may not be advanced for first time on appeal). -2- 2 Appellate Case: 10-2679 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/08/2011 Entry ID: 3763782

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?