Grant v. Young
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
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
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.
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.
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
It is SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 17th day of November, 2013.
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?