Bocanegra v. Warden, No. 3:2018cv00909 - Document 3 (N.D. Ind. 2018)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: The Court DENIES the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to Section 2254 Habeas Corpus Rule 4. The case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 11/26/18. (ksp)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Bocanegra v. Warden Doc. 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION LUIS BOCANEGRA, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 3:18-CV-909-JD-MGG OPINION AND ORDER Luis Bocanegra, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his disciplinary sanctions in case WCC 18-05-521 where a Disciplinary Hearing Officer (DHO) found him guilty of possessing unauthorized security threat insignia in violation of Indiana Department of Correction policy B-208. ECF 2 at 1. However, Bocanegra did not lose any earned credit time nor was he demoted in credit class as a result of this disciplinary hearing. ECF 2 at 1, 2-1 at 1, 4. A prison disciplinary hearing can only be challenged in a habeas corpus proceeding where it results in the lengthening of the duration of confinement. Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003). Here, because this disciplinary hearing did not result in the lengthening of the duration of Bocanegra’s confinement, habeas corpus relief is not available. Because there is no relief that he can obtain in this habeas corpus proceeding, the petition will be denied. For these reasons, the court DENIES the petition pursuant to Section 2254 Habeas Corpus Rule 4 and the case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Dockets.Justia.com SO ORDERED on November 26, 2018 /s/ JON E. DEGUILIO JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
