Jeremy Martin Haar v. Eric Walters, Warden, FCI Pekin

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois denied Jeremy Martin Haar’s petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Haar challenged the revocation of 27 days of good-conduct time following a disciplinary finding that he used a prohibited three-way telephone call, arguing lack of impartiality, inadequate notice, and vagueness. The court held that the disciplinary proceedings satisfied due process, that Haar received fair notice of the telephone rules, and that Prohibited Act 297 was not unconstitutionally vague.

Holdings

1. Haar did not present clear evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption that the Discipline Hearing Officer was honest and impartial; the alleged comments, even if made, did not establish that the hearing outcome was predetermined.
2. Due process did not require FCI Lewisburg to provide Haar with a new rule book because he had previously received Bureau of Prisons materials and an inmate handbook giving notice that third-party and three-way telephone calls were prohibited.
3. Prohibited Act 297 is not unconstitutionally vague, and its application to prohibit three-way telephone calls is not vague.
4. The disciplinary proceedings satisfied the minimum due-process requirements applicable to revocation of good-conduct time.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Discipline Hearing Officer was impermissibly biased or predetermined Haar's guilt.
2. Whether due process required FCI Lewisburg to provide Haar with a new rule book or orientation materials despite his prior receipt of Bureau of Prisons telephone rules at FCI Schuylkill.
3. Whether Bureau of Prisons Prohibited Act 297 is facially void for vagueness.
4. Whether Haar was entitled to habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 based on the disciplinary proceeding and revocation of good-conduct time.

Disposition

other