Wesley Thomas Gallop, Jr. v. M.E. Cordle

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia grants Defendant M.E. Cordle’s motion to dismiss a prisoner’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 procedural due process claim. The court holds that the alleged consequences of Gallop’s institutional disciplinary conviction—including loss of telephone privileges, loss of a prison job, transfer, security reclassification, and designation as a high-risk sexual aggressor—did not establish a protected liberty interest or an atypical and significant hardship under the Due Process Clause. The court directs the Clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. A prisoner cannot state a federal procedural due process claim unless he first identifies a protected liberty or property interest and shows that the interest was deprived without constitutionally adequate process.
2. The alleged loss of telephone privileges and prison employment, transfer and reclassification, reduced prospects for discretionary parole or pardon, and high-risk sexual-aggressor designation did not establish a protected liberty interest.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Gallop's alleged loss of telephone privileges, prison employment, security-classification change and transfer, reduced prospects for discretionary parole or pardon, and high-risk sexual-aggressor designation established a protected liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment.
2. Whether Gallop stated a procedural due process claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the denial of video evidence and the resulting disciplinary conviction.

Disposition

dismissed