Sims v. Hocker

United States District Court, Central District of Illinois · July 15, 2025 · No. 4:23-cv-04221-JEH

Summary

This is a United States District Court order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment in a civil rights action brought by an incarcerated plaintiff alleging due process violations stemming from a prison disciplinary hearing. The court found that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a protected liberty interest, as the disciplinary sanctions only involved a job reassignment and loss of future good-time credit eligibility rather than actual deprivation of earned credits. Additionally, the court noted that the claim was barred under Heck v. Humphrey because the guilty finding had not been overturned, and found insufficient evidence of personal involvement by the warden. Consequently, judgment was entered in favor of all defendants.

Court
United States District Court, Central District of Illinois
Writing for the Court
Jonathan E. Hawley
Jurisdiction
United States District Court, Central District of Illinois
Decision date
July 15, 2025
Docket number
4:23-cv-04221-JEH
Procedural posture
Defendants' motion for summary judgment
Standard of review
Summary‑judgment standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
other

Topics

prisoners rightscivil rightsdue processsection 1983civil procedure

Practice areas

civil rights litigationprison law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Plaintiff possessed a protected liberty interest in his prison job and good‑time credits under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause
  2. Whether Defendants can be held liable under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for alleged due‑process violations
  3. Whether summary judgment is appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56

Holdings

  1. Plaintiff does not have a constitutionally protected liberty interest in a prison job or in the opportunity to earn future good‑time credits; therefore, no due‑process violation exists.
  2. Defendant Warden Baker is not personally involved in the alleged deprivation and therefore cannot be held liable under §1983; Defendant Hocker’s claim is barred because the guilty finding has not been invalidated.
  3. Defendants are entitled to summary judgment because no genuine issue of material fact exists regarding any alleged due‑process violation or personal involvement.

Key quotations

Prison inmates do not have a constitutional right to any form of prison employment . . . . (at 3)

Factual background

In March 2023 Plaintiff Danny Sims, an inmate at IDOC's Henry Hill Correctional Center, received a disciplinary ticket for disobeying a direct order. The ticket was heard by the Program Unit Committee, chaired by Defendant Kendall Hocker, who found Sims guilty and reassigned his prison job. No loss of good‑time credits was shown. Defendant Tyrone Baker was the warden at Hill.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed a §1983 complaint on Dec. 11, 2023 alleging Fourteenth Amendment due process violations arising from a disciplinary ticket at IDOC's Henry Hill Correctional Center. The case was transferred from the Southern District of Illinois to this court. After a merit review, the court considered the defendants' summary‑judgment motions.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from United States District Court Central District Of Illinois