United States Tenth Circuit

In an inmate's suit brought under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 seeking damages arising from a disciplinary proceeding and alleging that defendants abridged his due-process rights when they reduced his security-classification level, which adversely affected the rate at which he could earn credits against his sentence, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed over claims that: 1) his complaint should have been construed as a habeas petition; 2) prison officials who reduced his credit-earning status did not comply with state law; 3) the reduction of his classification level implicated a liberty interest that required due-process protections; 4) defendants maliciously conspired to fabricate a misconduct charge; and 5) defendants acted with malicious intent and violated due process with respect to the prison disciplinary proceeding, thus entitling him to money damages.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/18/2007
• Published 06/19/2007

Judges

• BRISCOE, Circuit Judge., Before BRISCOE, McKAY, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Submitted on the briefs: , Rogelio Cardoso, Pro Se.


• For Appellees:
  
• Anne E. Zachritz, Jennifer B. Scott, of Andrews Davis, Oklahoma City, OK, for Defendants-Appellees Sam Calbone, Tanya Vanwey, Greg Courtney, Jeremy Davis, Jewel Beasley, Russell Stewart, Travis Smith, Joe Spruiell, and Horace Alexander., Linda Soper, Assistant Attorney General, Oklahoma Attorney General's Office, Litigation Section, Oklahoma City, OK, for Defendants-Appellees Ron Ward and Melinda Guilfoyle.