Wilkins v. Warden
3:20-cv-00911
N.D. Ind.May 5, 2021Background
- Preston J. Wilkins, an Indiana prisoner, was charged in disciplinary case WCC-20-3-243 with possession of an intoxicating substance (Offense 231) at Westville Correctional Facility.
- After a disciplinary hearing he was found guilty and sanctioned with loss of 70 days earned credit time and a demotion in credit class.
- Wilkins received a second hearing following his appeal of the first hearing and challenged the second hearing as violating the Double Jeopardy Clause.
- He also claimed due process violations for denial of requested evidence/witnesses (a staff statement from “Ms. Walker” and a video) and alleged hearing-officer bias because officers had previously found him guilty.
- Correctional staff produced an inmate statement, could not locate Ms. Walker, and the video was unavailable; the district court denied Wilkins’s habeas petition and refused in forma pauperis status for appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Double Jeopardy from second hearing | Second hearing after appeal amounted to retrial in violation of Double Jeopardy | First hearing resulted in a guilty finding; double jeopardy does not attach in prison disciplinary proceedings | Denied: no double jeopardy—disciplinary proceedings do not trigger same protections as criminal acquittal |
| Denial of witnesses/documentary evidence | Not allowed to present Ms. Walker or video, depriving him of due process | Staff provided inmate statement; Ms. Walker could not be located; video unavailable—reasonable basis to deny requests | Denied: staff had reasonable grounds to refuse; no due process violation |
| Hearing-officer impartiality | Officers were not impartial because they had found him guilty at the earlier hearing | No evidence officers were personally involved in incident; adverse prior rulings alone do not show bias | Denied: presumption of honesty applies; no improper bias shown |
| Appeal procedure / in forma pauperis | (Wilkins sought to appeal) | COA not required for disciplinary habeas appeals; court finds appeal not taken in good faith under §1915(a)(3) | Court: no COA required; denied leave to proceed IFP on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Evans v. Michigan, 568 U.S. 313 (Double Jeopardy bars retrial after a court-decreed acquittal)
- Portee v. Vannatta, [citation="105 F. App'x 855"] (7th Cir.) (double jeopardy protections do not attach in prison disciplinary proceedings)
- Decker v. Bell, [citation="772 F. App'x 339"] (7th Cir.) (same principle in disciplinary context)
- Meeks v. McBride, 81 F.3d 717 (7th Cir.) (double jeopardy and disciplinary proceeding limits)
- Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (due process standards for prison disciplinary hearings—notice, witnesses, documentary evidence)
- Piggie v. Cotton, 342 F.3d 660 (7th Cir.) (presumption of honesty for prison adjudicators; high standard to show bias)
- Thomas v. Reese, 787 F.3d 845 (7th Cir.) (adverse rulings alone insufficient to demonstrate adjudicator bias)
- Evans v. Circuit Court, 569 F.3d 665 (7th Cir.) (certificate of appealability not required for habeas challenges to prison disciplinary proceedings)