Case Name: Michael D. WHITENER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Alan FINNAN, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-04-10
Citations: 221 F. App'x 463
Docket Number: No. 06-2888
Parties: Michael D. WHITENER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Alan FINNAN, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 221
Pages: 463–464

Head Matter:
Michael D. WHITENER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Alan FINNAN, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 06-2888.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2007.
Decided April 10, 2007.
Michael D. Whitener, Michigan City, IN, pro se.
Before Hon. DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge, Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge, Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge.
After this appeal was filed, Whitener was transferred to a different facility. We have substituted the warden of that facility as the respondent.
After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessaiy. Thus the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
ORDER
Indiana inmate Michael Whitener appeals the district court's decision denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Whitener claims that his right to due process was violated in a prison disciplinary proceeding because insufficient evidence supported the Final Reviewing Authority's finding that he had aided a battery. We had previously determined that, in order to resolve this issue, we needed to review the investigator's case file and internal affairs summary that the Final Reviewing Authority relied on but that was not part of the record in the district court. We ordered a limited remand so the district court could receive these materials into the record and forward them to us. The district court has now done this, and our review of this material convinces us that "some evidence" supports the Final Reviewing Authority's decision. See Superintendent, Mass. Corr. Inst., Walpole v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455-57, 105 S.Ct. 2768, 86 L.Ed.2d 356 (1985); Webb v. Anderson, 224 F.3d 649, 652 (7th Cir.2000). Therefore we AFFIRM the decision of the district court.