2 Shroyer also contends that his due process rights were violated because the hearing was not postponed so that he could subpoena the individuals involved in the original investigation into the misconduct, the two other inmates involved, the individuals at Camp Hill who produced the assessment figures and a business manager from another prison institution. He also contends that there was insufficient evidence to establish the amount of damages. Because of the manner in which we have resolved this appeal, we need not consider those issues. 4 Shroyer also contends that the Department violated his due process rights to a fair and impartial tribunal by allowing the hearing examiner to co-mingle the prosecutorial and adjudicative functions during the assessment hearing. Contrary to this contention, however, there is no evidence that the hearing examiner was acting in a prosecutorial function during the hearing given that his only role was to hear the evidence presented by both sides as to the proper assessment figure.
Jurisdiction is relinquished.