Lavelle Malone v. Keith Butts and Bruce Lemmon
974 N.E.2d 1025
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Malone, acting pro se, seeks a writ of mandate against the IDOC officials after a DHB ruling and subsequent visiting restrictions.
- DHB found Malone guilty of battery with a weapon on April 1, 2011, sanctioning one year of disciplinary segregation, 365 days of earned credit time loss, and downgrading credit class from 1 to 3.
- DOC issued a modification of visiting privileges on April 4, 2011 restricting Malone to non-contact visits for one year, noting an appeal could be made under Policy 00-02-301.
- Malone filed an offender grievance April 13, 2011; the final authority denied relief by letter dated May 10, 2011 stating he exhausted all appeal rights.
- Malone filed the petition for writ of mandate on June 3, 2011 seeking compliance with Indiana Code § 11-11-5-4(4).
- The trial court dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim on February 28, 2012, and Malone appeals the dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the mandate action was proper given the visitation restriction was administrative | Malone: restriction violated statute and cannot be enforced via mandate | DOC: restriction was an administrative action under 11-11-3-9 not barred by 11-11-5-4(4) | Mandate proper only where no adequate remedy; here administrative action authorized, so dismissal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Varner v. Ind. Parole Bd., 905 N.E.2d 493 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (mandate available where agency action within department of correction; absence of adequate remedy at law)
- Kimrey v. Donahue, 861 N.E.2d 379 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (limits on court review of inmate claims absent explicit private right of action or constitutional rights)
- Blanck v. Ind. Dep’t of Corr., 829 N.E.2d 505 (Ind. 2005) (inmates have no general right to review DOC disciplinary decisions in state court)
- Perry v. Ballew, 873 N.E.2d 1068 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (mandamus authority; ministerial duties; adequate remedy at law)
- State ex rel. Steinke v. Coriden, 831 N.E.2d 751 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (mandamus disfavored; extraordinary remedy)