Grant v. Young

Filing 7

ORDER OVERRULING objections of petitioner and ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 . Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 11/17/13. (bas, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
KEVIN GRANT

§

VS.

§

SCOTT YOUNG, WARDEN

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:13-CV-100

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner, Kevin Grant, a federal prisoner confined at FCI Texarkana, proceeding pro se,
and in forma pauperis, filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
The Court referred this matter to the Honorable Caroline Craven, United States
Magistrate Judge, at Texarkana, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders
of this Court. The Magistrate Judge recommends the petition for writ of habeas corpus be
denied.
The Court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the record, and pleadings. Petitioner
filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. This requires a de novo
review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and applicable law. See FED . R. CIV . P.
72(b).
Petitioner challenges a disciplinary conviction. In his objections, he again argues that
prison officials failed to comply with prison regulations during the investigation and disciplinary
proceedings. Even if petitioner is correct, this allegation would not entitle him to relief. As
stated by the Magistrate Judge, failure to follow prison regulations, standing alone, does not
constitute a violation of a petitioner’s due process rights. Murphy v. Collins, 26 F.3d 541, 543
(5th Cir. 1994). “A prison official’s failure to follow the prison’s own policies, procedures or
regulations does not constitute a violation of due process, if constitutional minima are
nevertheless met.” Myers v. Klevenhagen, 97 F.3d 91, 94 (5th Cir. 1996) (citations omitted). In

Wolff ,the Supreme Court established the process due an inmate charged with violating prison
rules. Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974). As petitioner
has not established he was denied any of the procedural protections established in Wolff, he is not
entitled to relief. The objections are, therefore, without merit.
.
ORDER
Accordingly, the objections of petitioner are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the report of the Magistrate Judge is
ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the Magistrate
Judge’s recommendations.
It is SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 17th day of November, 2013.

____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2