Title: QUIGG REINHARDT v CRIST
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 13815
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: June 19, 1978

No. 13815 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF E'IONTANA 1968 GARY L. QUIGG and MICHAEL B. REINHARDT, et al., Petitioners, ROGER W. CRIST, Warden of the Montana State Prison, James Blodgett, Deputy Warden, GARY WEER, Associate Warden, et al., Responents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING: Counsel of Record: For Appellants: Byron W. Boggs, Drummond, Montana For Respondents: Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana James Masar, County Attorney, Deer Lodge, Montana Submitted on briefs Submitted: January 5, 1978 Decided : Clerk M r . Justice John C. Harrison delivered the Opinion of the Court: Petitioners Gary L. Quigg and Michael B. Reinhardt f i l e d a l t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OR OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR RELIEF: INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: AND A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT" before t h i s Court M a y 11, 1977. B y order dated the same day, t h i s Court directed that the cause be forwarded t o the District Court, Powell County, for an evidentiary hearing, and upon completion, to forward a copy of the disposition t o t h i s Court. The District Court held a hearing June 30, 1977, and entered i t s findings and conclusions September 13, 1977. This Court notified the parties by order dated November 4, 1977, t o submit briefs with regard t o the findings and conclu- sions. Counsel for petitioners and respondent have each f i l e d a memorandum i n accord with such order. W e f i r s t note that even under the broad relief requested, t h i s petition does not come within any of the standards for extraordinary r e l i e f . Petitioners have failed to submit a trans- c r i p t of the proceedings i n the District Court for t h i s Court t o determine whether the findings and conclusions of the District Court are correct. The facts alleged for habeas corpus relief as taken from the briefs of the two petitioners are: 1.QUIGG. Petitioner Quigg apparently got into trouble when he was ordered t o move from the old prison f a c i l i t y t o the new prison. H e refused to move because h i s friends were i n the old prison. Quigg was transported and when he refused t o move into h i s assigned quarters he was taken t o maximum security u n t i l he agreed t o move in. H e was i n maximum security from March 21 t o March 30, 1977, a t which time he agreed t o move in. A t that time a hearing was held with regard t o h i s violation of prison rules, he was found guilty, and the time he served was considered the punishment. Quigg alleges he was deprived of h i s right t o a hearing under the prison rules, and also he was deprived of medical attention and certain personal supplies during h i s confinement i n maximum security. Quigg alleges he was nervous and tense and unable t o eat a t that time. Respondent s t a t e s that prison personnel denied these con- tentions and gave him a hearing a s soon as he agreed t o comply with prison rules and move in. The District Court found that any deprivation "was caused by Quigg's own actions and was a t most a temporary situation." Quigg complains that he was not allowed t o c a l l witnesses on h i s behalf a t the hearing or t o consult with a "lay advisor" and that the delay in the hearing violates prison regulations. He asks t h i s Court t o amend the District Court's findings t o say that Quigg's confinement was unlawful as a violation of due process and cruel and unusual punishment. Apparently, prison officicals did lose Quigg's personal property i n the move and the District Court ordered that he be reimbursed $100. Neither Quigg nor the prison o f f i c i a l s dispute t h i s part of the order. 2. REINHARDT. Reinhardt was placed in maximum security for having h i s pir too long and not braided according to prison regulations. The District Court found that he was warned beforehand, properly charged, found guilty of t h i s violation, and his complaint had no m e r i t . The gist of petitioners' complaint seems to be directed to the violations of prison regulations and the fact they were placed in maximum security due to violations of those regulations. They served their time before the hearing in the matter. Quigg has been paroled to attend the University of Montana. We find the petitions moot and deny them. We Concur: