Johnson v. Superintendent
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 7 MOTION to Dismiss Petition as Moot by Respondent Superintendent. The 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Matthew Johnson is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Clerk DIRECTED to close this case. Signed by Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 1/3/17. (cc: Matthew Johnson). (cer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION AT LAFAYETTE
Cause No. 4:16-CV-050-JD-PRC
OPINION AND ORDER
Matthew Johnson, a pro se prisoner, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging a prison
disciplinary hearing (MCF-16-02-204), where a Miami Correctional Facility Disciplinary
Hearing Officer (“DHO”) found him guilty of Abusive Sexual Contact with a Visitor, in
violation of B-205. (DE 1.) Johnson was sanctioned with a written reprimand, a change of
housing assignment, thirty (30) days lost phone and commissary privileges, a thirty (30) day
deprivation of earned credit time, and a demotion in credit class. (Id.)
After he filed this petition, the Indiana Department of Correction (“IDOC”) reconsidered
this case and reduced the charge to Refusing an Order, in violation of C-347. (DE 7-6.) With the
reduction in charge, the IDOC also reversed the loss of earned credit time and demotion in credit
class. (Id.) The lost time from both sanctions were returned to Johnson. (Id.) Based on the
IDOC’s recent action, the respondent now moves to dismiss the petition as moot. (DE 7.) As the
respondent points out, because the remaining sanctions do not affect the term of Johnson’s
custody, there is at present nothing 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 resulted in a sanction that lengthened the duration of his confinement).
Johnson was afforded to December 12, 2016, in which to respond to the motion. (See DE
9.) He has not responded. Nevertheless, he has succeeded here as the imposed sanctions that
resulted in lengthening the duration of his confinement have been reversed and the lost time has
been restored. Thus, this case must be dismissed because there is no case or controversy to
adjudicate. Id. Accordingly, the petition will be dismissed.
For these reasons, the motion to dismiss (DE 7) is GRANTED, the petition (DE 1) is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and the clerk is DIRECTED to close this case.
ENTERED: January 3, 2017
/s/ JON E. DEGUILIO
United States District Court
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?