I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding. As the majority notes, a charge against an inmate be proven by a preponderance of the evidence, defined at TDOC Policy No. 502.01(IV)(I) as “[t]he degree of proof which best accords with reason and probability and is more probable than not.” As the majority also notes, the evidence upon which Mr. Hanley’s conviction rested consisted of the two knives and Corporal Story’s statement, the salient portion of which is quoted in the majority opinion. Corporal Story did not testify and the only live witnesses were Mr. Hanley, who denied that the knives were his, and Duane Brooks, an inmate who testified in support of Mr. Hanley’s contention that the knives were left by a previous occupant of the cell.
Case Number
              M2016-01223-COA-R3-CV
          Originating Judge
              Chancellor Joseph A. Woodruff 
          Case Name
              Bryan R. Hanley v. Turney Center Disciplinary Board, et al. - Dissenting
          Date Filed
              Dissent or Concur
              This is a dissenting opinion
          Download PDF Version
              hanley.bryan_.diss_.opn_.pdf132.16 KB
           
                                  



