Jeffrey Pina v. Rebecca Tamez , 470 F. App'x 298 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 11-10710     Document: 00511838524         Page: 1     Date Filed: 04/30/2012
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    April 30, 2012
    No. 11-10710
    Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    JEFFREY T. PINA,
    Petitioner-Appellant
    v.
    REBECCA TAMEZ, Warden,
    Respondent-Appellee
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:10-CV-934
    Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Jeffrey T. Pina, federal prisoner # 24261-038, appeals the district court’s
    denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for habeas corpus, arguing that the
    evidence was insufficient to support his prison disciplinary conviction that
    resulted in his forfeiting good time credits. We review for clear error the district
    court’s factual findings and review de novo the district court’s legal conclusions.
    Jeffers v. Chandler, 
    253 F.3d 827
    , 830 (5th Cir. 2001).
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
    R. 47.5.4.
    Case: 11-10710    Document: 00511838524     Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/30/2012
    No. 11-10710
    Pina argues that the evidence was insufficient to show that he aided and
    abetted another prisoner in possessing a cell phone. “[T]he requirements of due
    process are satisfied if some evidence supports the decision by the prison
    disciplinary board to revoke good time credits.” Superintendent, Mass. Corr.
    Inst., Walpole v. Hill, 
    472 U.S. 445
    , 455 (1985). We are not required to examine
    the entire record, to assess independently the credibility of witnesses, or to
    weigh the evidence. 
    Id. at 455.
    “[P]rison disciplinary proceedings will be
    overturned only where there is no evidence whatsoever to support the decision
    of the prison officials.” Reeves v. Pettcox, 
    19 F.3d 1060
    , 1062 (5th Cir. 1994).
    It cannot be said in Pina’s case that “there is no evidence whatsoever to
    support the decision of the prison officials” that would require overturning the
    disciplinary proceeding. See 
    id. In particular,
    the cell phone was found in Pina’s
    work area, the phone’s incoming and outgoing call log listed a telephone number
    found only on Pina’s approved call list, and he stated that he thought another
    prisoner would take responsibility for having the cell phone.
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-10710

Citation Numbers: 470 F. App'x 298

Filed Date: 4/30/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023