Havener v. Glaser
Citation | 251 N.W.2d 753 |
Decision Date | 11 March 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 587,587 |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota |
Parties | Joseph H. HAVENER, Warden of the North Dakota State Penitentiary, Petitioner, v. Gerald G. GLASER, Judge of the District Court, Burleigh County, Fourth Judicial District, Respondent. Crim. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. For the reasons stated in the opinion, it is held that the facts in this case do not trigger the protections afforded by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
2. For the reasons stated in the opinion, a supervisory writ is granted quashing the order of the district court and a writ is authorized directing the warden to more fully comply with appropriate regulations.
Edwin F. Zuern, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Bismarck, for petitioner.
Houdek & Wolberg, Bismarck, for respondent; argued by Duane Houdek, Bismarck.
We are asked by Joseph H. Havener, warden of the North Dakota State Penitentiary, to issue a supervisory writ staying a February 11, 1977, order of the North Dakota district court, fourth judicial district, releasing prisoners Richard Collins and Michael Schroeder from administrative isolation. On February 11, we directed that the order of the district court be stayed until further order of this court, and that the Honorable Gerald G. Glaser, judge of the district court, show cause why the stay order should not be made permanent. A show cause hearing was held at 10:00 a. m. February 17, 1977, before this court.
This matter came to the district court as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, brought by counsel for prisoners Collins and Schroeder, under Chapter 32-22, N.D.C.C.
Both prisoners were placed in administrative isolation (referred to by the parties as AI) on October 26, 1976, after allegedly being found in possession of marijuana within the confines of the penitentiary 11 days earlier. The AI unit exists pursuant to Section 505, North Dakota State Penitentiary Administrative Regulations (November 28, 1975, as amended February 27, 1976), which reads:
In compliance with paragraph 10 of the above regulation, the status of both Schroeder and Collins was reviewed on November 26 and December 23, 1976, and on January 18, 1977. The decision was made following each review to retain the prisoners in AI. The reasons given for continuing Schroeder and Collins in AI ranged from a flat recommendation that each "continue in AI with periodic reviews" to a conclusion that the prisoner "is still considered a threat to the security of the institution." Schroeder and Collins maintain that this is not sufficient to provide due process; that the reasons for continuance and identification of criteria and standards employed in reaching the determination must be provided in writing. This position was essentially approved by the district court in issuing the writ.
The court, in its memorandum opinion, relies heavily upon Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974). In that case, revocation of a State prisoner's good-time credit for satisfactory behavior while in prison, where the right to good-time credit was statutorily created by the State and it recognized that its deprivation was a sanction for major misconduct, the Court found that the prisoner had a Fourteenth Amendment "liberty" interest entitling him to minimum due process procedural rights. Pertinent parts of the district court's memorandum opinion follow:
In considering whether or not a supervisory writ should issue, we must...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Olson v. Maxwell
... ... Havener v. Glaser, 251 N.W.2d 753 (N.D.1977) ... Courts have employed basically a two-tiered test in determining the constitutional ... ...
- Coon v. N. Dakota Dep't of Health & Rolling Green Family Farms Re, LLP, 20170089.
-
Klein, In Interest of, 10187
... ... v. Kidder County Social Service Board, 295 N.W.2d 401, 404 (N.D.1980); Havener v. Glaser, 251 N.W.2d 753, 757 (N.D.1977); LePera v. Snider, 240 N.W.2d 862, 867 (N.D.1976); In re Zimmer, 64 N.D. 410, 253 N.W. 749, 750 (1934); ... ...
-
Little v. Graff
... ... City of Bismarck v. District Court, 64 N.D. 399, 253 N.W. 744 (1934) and Havener v. Glaser, 251 N.W.2d 753 (N.D.1977), we also agreed to exercise our superintending jurisdiction to review whether the trial court's habeas order was ... ...