Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01248/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01248-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

FILED 

tJnJttd Scace Court of Appeals 

'Tenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

APR 2 4 1990 

PAUL LOUIS MARTINEZ, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

CHASE RIVELAND, individually and in his ) 

official capacity as Executive Director ) 

of Colorado Department of Corrections; ) 

WILLIAM W. WILSON, individually and in ) 

his official capacity as Superintendent, ) 

Centennial Correctional Facility; CARLOS ) 

BACA, individually and in his official ) 

capacity as Asst. Superintendent of ) 

Centennial Correctional Facility, WARREN ) 

FOX, individually and in his official ) 

capacity as Classification Officer, ) 

Centennial Correctional Facility; LN ) 

WORLEY, individually and in his official ) 

capacity as Asst. Classification Officer, ) 

Centennial Correctional Facility, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

llOBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 89-1248 

(D.C. No. 86-C-1502) 

( D. Colo.) 

Before LOGAN, SEYMOUR, and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-1248 Document: 01019972049 Date Filed: 04/24/1990 Page: 1 
34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Prose prisoner Paul Louis Martinez, a prisoner at the 

Centennial Correction Facility in Carson City, Colorado, appeals 

the district court's order dismissing Martinez' claims for damages 

against various officials of the Colorado Department of 

Corrections under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Martinez' motion for leave to 

proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is also before us. We grant 

the in forma pauperis motion and affirm. 

The events leading to Martinez' lawsuit began on July 21, 

1985, when Martinez was charged with assaulting another prisoner. 

He was immediately placed in segregation and the following day was 

served with a formal notice of charge. Ten days after placement 

in segregation, a hearing was held at which Martinez was advised 

of his right to remain silent. Martinez asked that the inmate he 

allegedly assaulted and certain employees of the prison appear at 

the hearing as witnesses. The hearing officer refused to call 

them unless plaintiff produced some evidence to support his selfdefense theory. Martinez then opted to testify, after which both 

the other inmate and a prison officer were called as witnesses. 

The hearing officer found Martinez guilty of assault and he 

was assigned to punitive segregation for thirty days. On the last 

day of his punitive segregation sentence, plaintiff asked to be 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-1248 Document: 01019972049 Date Filed: 04/24/1990 Page: 2 
removed to the general prison population. This same day, prison 

officials served him with a reclassification notice informing him 

that his history of violent behavior merited admi nistrative 

segregation. He destroyed this notice and was served with 

another. Three days later he received a reclassification hearing 

which he chose not to attend. 

Martinez appeals the magistrate's conclusion, adopted by the 

district court, that the procedures afforded Martinez in his 

punitive and administrative segregation hearings gave him due 

process. We have reviewed the pleadings and the record and agree 

with the magistrate's conclusion that Martinez received his 

constitutional entitlement to notice and a right to respond. See 

Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 476 (1983). We also agree that the 

process afforded Martinez in his reclassification to administrative segregation satisfied the Hewitt standard, and that the 

decision to so classify him on the basis of his violent and 

uncooperative history was not arbitrary and capricious. See 

Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 228 (1976}(prison officials have 

discretion to reclassify inmates based on past general conduct). 

Finally, we find no substance in Martinez' claim that he was 

compelled to testify against himself. In any event, Martinez 

gives no indication that his testimony was incriminating rather 

than exculpatory. The district court order is AFFIRMED. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 89-1248 Document: 01019972049 Date Filed: 04/24/1990 Page: 3 
The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-4-

Entered for the Court 

Stephanie K. Seymour 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 89-1248 Document: 01019972049 Date Filed: 04/24/1990 Page: 4