David Barron v. Lisa Menard, Commissioner, Department of Corrections and Ralph Cherry, 160 A.3d 1030

Petitioner (an incarcerated individual) allegedly told a kitchen supervisor on Oct. 22, 2015, that a correctional officer "is never around me. I will beat him up," and the supervisor testified petitioner looked ready to assault the officer and she feared for his life.
Petitioner was placed in administrative segregation on Oct. 22 pending a disciplinary investigation under DOC Directive No. 410.01, which requires investigation within 3 business days and a hearing within 4 business days ("day one" = first full business day after segregation).
The disciplinary hearing was held Oct. 28 at ~8:00 p.m.; the hearing officer found petitioner guilty of threatening another person under the DOC rule (verbal threats require the offender have ability and opportunity to carry out the threat).
Petitioner sought review in superior court under V.R.C.P. 75, arguing insufficient evidence of ability/opportunity and that the hearing was untimely; the trial court granted DOC summary judgment and petitioner appealed.
The Vermont Supreme Court reviewed (summary-judgment standard) whether there was "some evidence" supporting the disciplinary finding and whether the DOC complied with the four-business-day deadline.

Issue	Barron’s Argument	DOC’s Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to show ability/opportunity to carry out threat	Evidence was insufficient; DOC failed to show context (distance, size, weapons, others) so no proof of ability/opportunity	Kitchen supervisor’s contemporaneous statement that Barron looked ready to assault and she feared for officer’s life provides some evidence of ability/opportunity	Court: Affirmed—supervisor’s statement supplies “some evidence” supporting the disciplinary conviction
Timeliness of disciplinary hearing under DOC policy	Hearing was untimely because it occurred at 8:00 p.m. on the fourth business day—argues business day ends at 5:00 p.m.	Directive defines "business day" as Mon–Fri (excl. holidays) but does not limit business hours; holding hearing on fourth business day (Oct. 28) satisfied policy	Court: Affirmed—hearing occurred on the fourth business day and policy does not impose a 5:00 p.m. cutoff

Herring v. Gorczyk, 173 Vt. 240 (Vt. 2001) (prison disciplinary decisions upheld if supported by “some evidence”)
Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445 (U.S. 1985) (standard that disciplinary findings must be supported by some evidence)