IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

KEENAN D. SIMMONS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CAUSE NO. 3:14-CV-1971

)

SUPERINTENDENT, )

)

Respondent. )

OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on a Petition under 28 U.S.C.

Paragraph 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in State

Custody filed by Keenan D. Simmons, a pro se prisoner, challenging

a disciplinary determination made by a hearing officer at Miami

Correctional Facility (“Miami”) under case number M.C.F. 14-04-

0162. For the reasons set forth below, the court DENIES the

petition (DE #1).

BACKGROUND

On April 21, 2014, Captain D. Reagle prepared a conduct report

charging Simmons with battery with serious bodily injury. (DE #1-

1.) The conduct report stated as follows: 

At approximately 1648hrs on 05/21/2014

offender Donald Lockhard #998348 was seen

stumbling out of his cell, he was disoriented

and confused. A check of his person revealed

that he has some marks on his body consistent

with an assault. Offender D. Lockhard was
taken to OSB1 for treatment, where he

continued to act confused and disoriented, and

at 1930hrs he was sent to Howard Co ER for

further treatment of possible head trauma. I,

Capt. D. Reagle, reviewed the camera and at

1107hrs on 04/15/2014 I saw offender Keenan

Simmons #159196 exit his cell in BHU445 after

getting dressed for chow. He then waited till

staff, Officer J. Shock, passed on his range

walk and went to cell BHU433. After a minute

of talking at the door you can see his posture

and body language change to an aggressive

stance and he enters the cell. Offender K.

Simmons is in cell BHU433 for 20 seconds,

although I cannot see his actions it was

apparent by the offenders on the range that

something of interest was going on by them

staring at the cell door and pointing the

entire time Offender K. Simmons is in the

cell. Offender K. Simmons then exits the

cells and walks towards the front of the

building. Moments later offender D. Lockhard

is seen stepping to his door and Offender K.

Simmons moves to the dayroom where he can look

into Cell BHU433. When Offender D. Lockhard

sees Offender K. Simmons on the range he

quickly goes back into his cell. Offender K.

Simmons can be seen on the range staring into

cell B433 until the unit exits for chow.

(DE 1-1, p. 1.)

On April 21, 2014, Simmons was notified of the charges. (Id.

at p. 2.) The screening report reflects that he pled not guilty,

did not request a lay advocate, and requested one witness

statement, but no physical evidence. (Id.) On April 23, 2014, a

hearing officer conducted a disciplinary hearing. (Id. at p. 3.)

Simmons made the following statement: “I was going out for lunch. 

I paid this guy to do my laundry. My laundry was not there. I

confronted the guy and he was going to check for laundry. That was

2
it. I did not touch him.” (Id.) The hearing officer found

Simmons guilty of battery based on staff reports, witness

statements, and photographs, and imposed a penalty of 120 days lost

earned time credits. (Id. at 7.) Simmons appealed to the facility

head and the final reviewing authority, but his appeals were

denied. (Id. at 4, 12.)

DISCUSSION

 When prisoners lose earned time credits in prison disciplinary

hearings, the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause guarantees

them certain procedural protections. To satisfy due process, there

must be “some evidence” in the record to support the hearing

officer’s determination. Superintendent, Mass. Corr. Inst. v.

Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455 (1985).

Simmons raises four claims in his petition: (1) there was a

lack of evidence; (2) there was a lack of witnesses; (3) there was

a five-hour lapse in time between the alleged assault and Lockhard

stumbling out of his cell; and (4) there is reasonable doubt. (DE

#1 at 3-4.) Essentially, all four of Simmons’s claims are the

same. He argues there was insufficient evidence to support a

guilty finding. (See DE #1 at 2, 3.)

In reviewing a disciplinary determination for sufficiency of

the evidence, “courts are not required to conduct an examination of

the entire record, independently assess witness credibility, or

3
weigh the evidence, but only determine whether the prison

disciplinary board's decision to revoke good time credits has some

factual basis.” McPherson v. McBride, 188 F.3d 784, 786 (7th Cir.

1999). “[T]he relevant question is whether there is any evidence

in the record that could support the conclusion reached by the

disciplinary board.” Hill, 472 U.S. at 455-56.

In this case, there is ample evidence to support the hearing

officer’s determination. The conduct report written by Captain

Reagle recounted that he viewed the video covering Lockhard’s cell,

which showed Simmons looking aggressive at the doorway of

Lockhard’s cell, going into Lockhard’s cell, causing a disturbance

for twenty seconds, leaving the cell, and Lockhard coming out hours

later beaten and disoriented. This is sufficient evidence by

itself.1 Moffat, 288 F.3d at 988 (witness statements constituted

some evidence); McPherson, 188 F.3d at 786 (7th Cir. 1999)(conduct

report alone provided some evidence to support disciplinary

determination). Although Simmons denies that he assaulted Lockhard

and focuses on the fact that the video does not show the actual

assault, it is not the province of this court to re-weigh the

evidence or determine the credibility of witnesses. McPherson, 188

F.3d at 786. Because there is some evidence to support the hearing

1

 Simmons complains that there is a five hour gap in time between his

entering Lockhard’s cell and Lockhard coming out of that cell beaten. 

Although immaterial to the court’s decision, this concern has been put to rest

in Officer Shock’s report. Officer Shock noted that Simmons was the only

person to enter Lockhard’s cell during the time period in question.

4
officer’s determination, the claim is denied.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, the Court DENIES the petition

(DE #1).

DATED: November 5, 2014 /s/ RUDY LOZANO, Judge

United States District Court

5