617 F. App'x 25
2d Cir.2015Background
- Randy Jamison, a New York state prisoner, challenged prison disciplinary proceedings under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after a hearing officer (Mark Tokarz) denied witness requests and photographic evidence; Jamison appealed administratively to Norman Bezio.
- District court granted summary judgment for Tokarz (July 11, 2013) and dismissed Bezio (Sept. 27, 2012); Jamison appealed to the Second Circuit.
- Jamison argued Tokarz violated his due-process right to call witnesses by relying on unsigned/incomplete "Witness Refusal Forms" and failing to conduct independent inquiries; he also claimed Bezio was liable for upholding the finding on appeal.
- The Second Circuit framed the appeal around qualified immunity and whether the alleged due‑process right was clearly established.
- Court addressed futility doctrine: Wolff permits denying witness requests for futility; Silva permits reasonable conclusions that a witness will not testify.
- Jamison failed to exhaust administrative remedies as to the photographic-evidence claim under the PLRA, so that claim was dismissed separately.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tokarz violated due process by denying witness requests | Jamison: denial based on incomplete Witness Refusal Forms was insufficient; needed independent inquiry | Tokarz: denial was a reasonable futility determination supported by staff statements | Held: No clearly established constitutional violation; qualified immunity for Tokarz |
| Whether the right to call witnesses was clearly established | Jamison: Wolff and Ponte clearly establish the right | Defendants: Wolff’s right is limited; futility determinations are permitted and not clearly bounded | Held: Law not "beyond debate"—officials entitled to qualified immunity |
| Whether Bezio is liable for affirming on administrative appeal | Jamison: Bezio’s affirmation makes him liable | Bezio: liability derivative of hearing officer’s conduct; no personal culpability beyond that | Held: Bezio entitled to qualified immunity (derivative claim); court did not decide personal‑involvement issue |
| Whether Tokarz violated due process by refusing photographic evidence | Jamison: refusal deprived him of exculpatory evidence | Defendants: claim not exhausted administratively under PLRA | Held: Claim dismissed for failure to exhaust; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974) (recognizes limited right of inmates to call witnesses in disciplinary hearings)
- Ponte v. Real, 471 U.S. 491 (1985) (inmate’s right to call witnesses is limited by prison safety and administrative concerns)
- Silva v. Casey, 992 F.2d 20 (2d Cir. 1993) (upholding futility determinations when a witness will not testify)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 131 S. Ct. 2074 (2011) (qualified immunity analysis permits deciding the "clearly established" prong first)
- Reichle v. Howards, 132 S. Ct. 2088 (2012) (qualified immunity framework reiterated)
- Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183 (1984) (violation of statute/regulation does not automatically defeat qualified immunity for constitutional claims)