Leiser v. Bretzel
2:23-cv-00395
| E.D. Wis. | Jul 31, 2025Background:
- Jeffrey Leiser, a pro se inmate at Redgranite Correctional Institution (RGCI), challenged two conduct reports from 2022 that resulted in 30 days of disciplinary segregation.
- The reports stemmed from incidents involving staff (Sgt. Nash and Sgt. Bretzel), including alleged threats and disrespectful conduct by Leiser.
- Leiser was given a disciplinary hearing for each report, received offers of uncontested dispositions, and ultimately accepted the penalty after an initial contested hearing.
- Leiser claimed procedural errors in the hearing process and argued that the segregation and its conditions violated his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights.
- The court addressed defendants’ motion for summary judgment and Leiser’s motions for an evidentiary hearing and sanctions.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liberty Interest Triggered by Segregation | 30-day segregation and conditions were atypical and significant hardships | 30-day segregation is not atypical/significant in prison context | No liberty interest triggered by 30-day segregation |
| Due Process During Disciplinary Hearings | Procedures were deficient (evidence rejection, partiality, errors) | Procedures met constitutional requirements | Due process standards were met |
| Sanctions for Alleged Perjury & Misconduct | Testimony of prison staff was perjured/inconsistent | Disagreements about facts/testimony are legitimate litigation issues | No evidence of perjury or sanctionable conduct |
| Requirement for Evidentiary Hearing | Factual disputes and procedural issues merit a hearing | No liberty interest at stake, disputes not material | No evidentiary hearing required |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (defining standard for summary judgment and material facts)
- Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (liberty interest in prison disciplinary segregation only for atypical/significant hardship)
- Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460 (informal due process sufficient for prison disciplinary actions)
- Wilkinson v. Austin, 545 U.S. 209 (examples of harsh segregation conditions triggering liberty interest)
- Gillis v. Litscher, 468 F.3d 488 (extremely harsh segregation conditions)
- Westefer v. Snyder, 422 F.3d 570 (due process requirements for harsh confinement)
- Lekas v. Briley, 405 F.3d 602 (short-term segregation generally does not trigger liberty interest)