Fielding v. State, 5 Div. 618
| Citation | 409 So.2d 964 |
| Decision Date | 24 November 1981 |
| Docket Number | 5 Div. 618 |
| Parties | Billy K. FIELDING v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
John R. Formby, Jr., Wetumpka, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Jean Williams Brown, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging that he was deprived of "good time" credit without due process of law. The District Attorney filed a "Motion to Deny Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus" attached to which was a copy of the "Alabama Board of Corrections Notice of Disciplinary Board Hearing" in petitioner's case. This completed form was not certified as being a true and correct copy or authenticated in any manner whatsoever.
The Circuit Judge granted the State's motion to dismiss without a hearing.
A petition for habeas corpus is the proper method by which a prisoner who claims to have been deprived of his "good time" credit without due process can challenge the results of his disciplinary hearing. Williams v. Davis, 386 So.2d 415 (Ala.1980).
In order to satisfy the minimum requirements of due process in a prison disciplinary proceeding, one requirement is that there must be a "written statement by the factfinders as to the evidence relied on and reasons" for the disciplinary action. Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 489, 92 S.Ct. 2593, 2604, 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972); approved in Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 564, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 2979, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974); Williams, supra. In this case the report of the disciplinary board hearing attached to the State's motion to dismiss only states the factual finding of the disciplinary court and the facts surrounding the charge. Nowhere in the report is there contained a written statement of the evidence relied on. Consequently, the report does not in and of itself show that the constitutional requirements of Wolff v. McDonnell, supra, were met. The circuit court erred in summarily granting the State's motion to dismiss the petition without a hearing.
The Attorney General also argues that the petition was properly dismissed because habeas corpus does not lie to challenge prospective detention. See Judge Bookout's dissent in Washington and Baldwin v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 5 Div. 594 (Ms. October 6, 1981) --- So.2d ----. Since the petitioner would not be entitled to immediate release from custody if his petition were...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Summerford v. State
...we indicated that loss of good time was not the sole occurrence which would trigger the requirements of Wolff. In Fielding v. State, 409 So.2d 964 (Ala.Cr.App.1981), we noted that, even if the withdrawal of petitioner's good time were ignored, the minimum requirements of due process would a......
-
Rice v. State, 5 Div. 885
...of habeas corpus. Williams v. Davis, 386 So.2d 415 (Ala.1980); Washington v. State, 405 So.2d 62 (Ala.Crim.App.1981); Fielding v. State, 409 So.2d 964 (Ala.Crim.App.1981), cert. denied, 409 So.2d 964 (Ala.1982). Habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy in this The State contends that Rice's ......
-
Jackson v. State
...Helveston v. State, 454 So.2d 1051, 1052 (Ala.Cr.App.1984); Matta v. State, 445 So.2d 572, 573 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Fielding v. State, 409 So.2d 964, 965 (Ala.Cr.App.1981); Washington v. State, 405 So.2d 62 (Ala.Cr.App.1981); Williams v. Davis, 386 So.2d 415 The present case concerns seventee......
-
Aaron v. State, 7 Div. 703
...of good time credit even if the inmate would not be entitled to immediate release upon restoration of his good time. Fielding v. State, 409 So.2d 964, 965 (Ala.Cr.App.1981). An accused's right to speedy trial remains undiminished even when he is already serving a prison sentence. Smith v. H......