587 F. App'x 802
5th Cir.2014Background
- Sterling J. McKoy, federal prisoner, appealed denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging a disciplinary conviction for committing a sexual act during a prison parenting class on May 27, 2008.
- McKoy alleged multiple procedural and evidentiary errors at the disciplinary hearing: denial of witness testimony (teacher Laura Wheeler and the entire class), failure to obtain class video, exclusion of documentary evidence (transfer approval), and inadequate consideration of his evidence by the DHO.
- He also argued his staff representative was unprepared and failed to gather or interview witnesses, and that the DHO applied an incorrect evidentiary standard and ignored exculpatory evidence about mechanical impossibility.
- The DHO relied on Wheeler’s incident report (hand inside pants, stroking motion), written statements from other inmates, McKoy’s own testimony, and found no video existed; McKoy reportedly waived personal appearances of some prisoners.
- McKoy invoked Due Process and the Accardi doctrine (agency must follow its own regulations), and sought an evidentiary hearing in district court; the district court denied relief and the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of witness testimony / cross-examination | McKoy: DHO should have called class, compelled Wheeler to answer questions, allowed interviews; absence prejudiced him | BOP/DHO: Witnesses’ written statements sufficed; no video existed; prisoners have no right to cross-examination | Affirmed — no due process violation; testimony would be cumulative and no video existed |
| Right to staff representative / adequacy of representation | McKoy: Representative had insufficient time, failed to investigate/interview witnesses | BOP/DHO: No constitutional right to counsel in disciplinary hearings absent illiteracy or complexity; McKoy was able to present evidence | Affirmed — no entitlement to appointed representative; issues not complex and no illiteracy shown |
| Sufficiency of evidence ("some evidence" standard) | McKoy: Report didn’t explicitly allege masturbation; claims mechanical impossibility | BOP/DHO: Wheeler’s incident report described hand inside pants and stroking motion, providing some evidence | Affirmed — record contained some evidence supporting conviction |
| Enforcement of BOP regulations / Accardi claim & need for evidentiary hearing | McKoy: DHO failed to follow BOP regs; seeks relief and an evidentiary hearing | BOP/DHO: Failure to follow internal regs absent prejudice does not warrant habeas relief; no factual basis shown for an evidentiary hearing | Affirmed — no prejudice shown from any regulatory deviation; no facts warranting evidentiary hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (constitutional minimal due process rights in prison disciplinary hearings)
- Morgan v. Quarterman, 570 F.3d 663 ("some evidence" standard review in disciplinary cases)
- Broussard v. Johnson, 253 F.3d 874 (no right to confrontation/cross-examination in prison disciplinary hearings)
- Accardi v. Shaughnessy, 347 U.S. 260 (agency must follow its own regulations)
- Richardson v. Joslin, 501 F.3d 415 (failure to follow prison regulations alone does not create constitutional violation absent prejudice)
- Mackey v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, [citation="440 F. App'x 373"] (no collateral relief for BOP procedural deviations without prejudice)