ÿWPCâ/  Ö ` Y©xÒ©°ìÒã†ÿQÑv!ƒþx–‚rºzx €KS8 {&ºF#FJ‘¾]³éGUéŸKV¨ˆ|àîm7">ï™ß›v9ãçmÖ²í3La·· ÒY=â}¿N•`²= S'§a¾ÀÀ^)*âoÎÁUê8E’/&«?ã¡Ë|’Ó9ÂØ“îYs¿CtU±ä¾)ªª!™é£(­òä#@V ªhNæ<íA6…&Ç Æ,š8ð…|4¿tÌ»øe¿Ý~yŽÎ%zm…¬(;á—ò)±†^ T`GÕÔ$^%|›ªið]Þ’hXÞLFEÆU!ønÖfk2ȯ²3r™×ÚÅb’]±«,‡îQ¨ÿ‰o‚ÃòÎúw¯§úc?e1bTƒqTú ú• ;*äZÀ´Žm \Õ$AyAB0ˆ~ðr9’#žè;'e|69‘îÿ¥æû´7€!çÖEBýÕM±“JÛ‚ÄðOs¥sLÈì¶Ùˆá¥Êf>›8QŽº.bk&JgCê&fŠY§œUœM´%cž…Ã'ÏFY~³¶NhÒý'3j[Ì)OV³ËÆïÄp¦@È1÷{Srp?Ué(0kDÊm_÷¡Æ†b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U.N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz UN‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1U N÷NEGêOE9; 0 D@„&—3½íðݱä$•%•%•%•%)¬&¬&¬&¬&¬&¬&¬&¬&¬&¬&¬&bÕ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ*Õ* 0 ëÝ*Ý*Ý*Ý* BÈ+È+ 0¤å+ D5‰, D-¾, 0Kë,ë, AS6-Ɖ- 0¤O. 0Dó. A«7/˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Œ†b+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular8n_+¨ï©k1\w¤ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular  àÝ ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€òòSuperintendent,€Massachusetts€Correctional€Institution,€Ô_ÔWalpoleÔ_Ô€v.€Hillóó,€472€U.S.€445,€105€S.€Ct.€2768Ð ° Ð(1985),€the€U.S.€Supreme€Court€explained€its€holding€in€òòWolff€v.€McDonnellóó€as€requiring€procedural€protections,€byÐ tÄ Ðvirtue€of€the€due€process€clause,€before€a€prison€inmate€could€be€deprived€of€a€protected€liberty€interest€in€accumulatedÐ 8ˆ Ðgood€time€credits.òò€€Hill,óó€472€U.S.€at€453,€105€S.€Ct.€at€2773.€€Inòò€Hillóó,€the€Court€recognized€the€holding€by€theÐ üL ÐMassachusetts€Supreme€Judicial€Court€that€state€law€created€a€liberty€interest€in€such€credits.€òò€Id.óó€Massachusetts€statuteÐ À Ðprovided€that€accumulated€sentence€credits€could€be€lost€ð ðif€a€prisoner€violates€any€rule€of€his€place€of€confinement.ðð€Ð „Ô ÐòòIdóó.€at€447,€2769.€€We€note€that€Tennessee€statutes€provide€for€the€loss€by€a€prisoner€of€previously€earned€sentenceÐ H ˜ Ðreduction€credits€only€in€certain€circumstances.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€41„21„236(a)€and€(g).€ ûÝ ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€Pol.€&€Proc.€#€502.01€VI.€A.2€also€prohibits€an€employee€from€sitting€on€a€hearing€panel€where€he€orÐ ° Ðshe€is€the€reporting€officer,€participated€in€the€investigation€of€the€charge,€has€personal€knowledge€of€the€case,€or€is€theÐ tÄ Ðinmateððs€assigned€counselor,€inmate€relations€coordinator,€or€unit€manager.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€record€was€attached€to€an€affidavit€certifying€it€as€the€disciplinary€appeal,€and€the€affidavit€was€filed€inÐ ° Ðsupport€of€the€motion€for€summary€judgment.€€This€filing,€in€essence,€complies€with€the€requirement€for€filing€of€theÐ tÄ Ðrecord€upon€grant€of€the€writ€of€certiorari.€€Because€it€is€certified€to€be€the€entire€record,€we€will€consider€it€as€such. Ý ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€lawsuit€had€been€dismissed,€and€the€dismissal€affirmed€on€appeal€before€the€charge€herein€was€brought.Ð ° ÐòòÔ_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€v.€Parkeróó,€No.€W1998„00640„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3CV,€2000€WL€52771€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jan.€10,€2000)Ô‡ ôé•òòôé•Ô(no€Tenn.€R.€App.Ð tÄ ÐP.€11€application€filed)Ô#†ôé•òò ôé•›#Ô. )Ý ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€alleged€he€was€charged€on€February€9,€the€hearing€was€continued€on€February€17,€and€was€heldÐ ° Ðon€February€22. ãÝ ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€record€of€the€disciplinary€hearing€indicates€he€was€not€segregated€while€waiting€for€his€hearing. ýÝ ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€requirement€of€some€material€evidence€to€support€the€decision€of€the€lower€tribunal€has€been€treatedÐ ° Ðanalytically€as€(1)€a€test€for€ð ðillegality,ðð€see,€e.g.,òòóó€òòHoover€v.€Metropolitan€Bd.€of€Zoning€Appealsóó,€924€S.W.2d€at€904„05Ð tÄ ¥ Ð(A€determination€that€there€is€no€material€evidence€to€support€the€decision€requires€the€reviewing€the€court€to€ð ðconcludeÐ ° Ðthat€the€administrative€body€acted€illegally.ðð);€(2)€as€a€standard€for€ð ðarbitraryðð€action,€òòsee,€e.g.,óó€òòSouth€v.€Tennessee€Bd.Ð tÄ Ðof€Paroles,óó€946€S.W.2d€310,€311€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996)€(ð ðOne€useful€criterion€for€determining€whether€a€decision€canÐ 8ˆ Ðbe€considered€to€be€arbitrary€is€whether€or€not€it€has€a€rational€basis.€€Perhaps€another€might€be€whether€it€is€supportedÐ üL Ðby€any€substantial€and€material€evidence€in€the€record.ðð);€(3)€as€a€separate€basis€for€grant€of€relief€under€the€commonÐ À Ðlaw€writ€of€certiorari,€sòòee,€e.góó.,€òòLions€Head€Homeownersðð€Ô_ÔAssððnÔ_Ô.€v.€Metropolitan€Bd.€of€Zoning€Appealsóó,€968€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€2dÐ „Ô Ð296,€303€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997)€(Persons€seeking€relief€under€common€law€writ€of€certiorari€have€the€burden€ofÐ H ˜ Ðdemonstrating€the€board€ð ðexceeded€its€jurisdiction,€acted€illegally,€arbitrarily,€or€without€material€evidence€to€supportÐ  \ Ðits€decision.ðð)€€While€it€is€not€necessary€to€precisely€categorize€the€appropriate€grounds€for€such€a€challenge,€we€thinkÐ Ð  Ðit€is€clear€that€€a€decision€that€is€not€based€on€some€material€evidence€is€subject€to€judicial€review€and€reversal.€€Thus,Ð ” ä  Ðwe€distinguish€lack€of€evidence€in€the€record€from€ð ðfailure€to€follow€essential€requirements€of€the€law.ðð §Ý ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„317. Ý ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€do€not€imply€that€a€statutory€violation€cannot€constitute€a€failure€to€conform€to€the€essential€requirementsÐ ° Ðof€the€law. Ý ƒRI1$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ‡ôé•òòôé•ÔSee€alsoóóÔ#†ôé•òòôé•#ÔÔ‡ôé•òòôé•Ô€òòÔ#†ôé•òòôé•Î#ÔÔ‡ôé•òòôé•ÔPerry€v.€Cold€Creek€Correctional€Facility€Disciplinary€Bd.,€óóNo.€M1999„01898„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2000Ð ° ÐWL€1137710,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.€9,€2000)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)òò€and€Ô_ÔBufordÔ_Ô€Ô_Ôv.Ô_Ô€TennesseeÐ tÄ ÐDepððt.€of€Correctionóó,€No.€M1998„000157„COA„R3„CV,€1999€WL€1015672,€at€*3„4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Nov.€10,€1999)Ð 8ˆ Ð(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)Ô#†ôé•òòôé•#Ô€Ô‡ôé•òòôé•Ô(determining€that€the€common€law€writ,€as€opposed€to€the€statutory€writ,€isÐ üL Ðthe€appropriate€mechanism).Ô#†ôé•òòôé•b#Ô- ù-(|G2I1$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€\­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôé•ò»»Ô d(|3ÇŒ$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€\­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÇŒ$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€\­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€\­»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼\­»»»ÔÑ8€AXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î[ \­ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼\­»îî[ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€January€9,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡XAX»¼\­ÔÌò òÔ#†¼\­»XXAÿ#ÔEL„Ô_ÔSHABAZZÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAHKEENÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔDONALÔ_Ô€CAMPBELL,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XAX»¼\­Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€00„1282„I€€€€€€Irvin€H.€Ô_ÔKilcreaseÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„02411„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€November€2,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓA€state€prisoner€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€his€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari€seeking€judicialÐ xÈ  Ðreview€of€sanctions€imposed€in€prison€disciplinary€proceedings.€€He€asserts€the€proceedings€deniedÐ d´ Ðhim€due€process€and€that€the€boardððs€failure€to€follow€Department€of€Correction€policies€andÐ P  Ðprocedures€constituted€an€illegality€under€state€law€grounds€for€common€law€writ€of€certiorari.€€WeÐ <Œ Ðaffirm€the€trial€court€and€hold€(1)€the€sanctions€imposed€did€not€trigger€due€process€protections,€(2)Ð (x Ðthe€alleged€failure€to€follow€specific€procedures€did€not€amount€to€failure€to€follow€the€essentialÐ d Ðrequirements€of€the€law€in€the€context€of€prison€disciplinary€proceedings,€and€(3)€there€was€evidenceÐ P Ðto€support€the€boardððs€finding.Ð ì< ÐÓFÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Courtó óÐ Ä Ðò òAffirmed€and€Remandedó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼\­»àXAÖ#ÔÔ‡XAX.¼\­ÔPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Ô_ÔCantrellÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,€M.S.,€óóÐ ˆØ Ðand€òòWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.,€J.óó,€joined.Ð tÄ ÐÌEl„Ô_ÔShabazzÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔHenningÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€Pro€Se.Ð L œ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter,€Michael€E.€Moore,€Solicitor€General,€DawnÐ $"t! ÐJordan,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€Ô_ÔDonalÔ_Ô€Campbell,€WestÐ #`" ÐTennessee€State€Penitentiary€Disciplinary€Board,€Lisa€Reynolds€and€James€Dukes.Ð ü#L# ÐÌÓ‚ ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼\­»XXA± #ÔÔ‡XAX»¼\­ÔÐ À&"& ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼\­»XXA! #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XAX»¼\­Ôà  àMr.€El„Ô_ÔShabazzÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€appeals€from€the€dismissal€by€the€trial€court€of€his€petition€forÐ ˜(è#( Ðstatutory€and€common€law€writ€of€certiorari€to€review€action€by€the€disciplinary€board€of€theÐ „)Ô$) Ðinstitution€in€which€Appellant€is€incarcerated.€€The€petition€alleges€that€the€board€found€AppellantÐ p*À%* Ðguilty€of€the€offense€ð ðconspiracy€to€violate€state€law€of€forgery,ðð€a€violation€of€the€Department€ofÐ \+¬&+ ÐCorrection€policy€502.02€IV.€€The€petition€further€alleges€that€the€punishment€imposed€by€the€boardÐ H,˜', Ðwas€five€days€in€punitive€segregation,€suspended€for€sixty€days,€and€a€$20.00€fine.Ð 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ô‡à  àThe€trial€court€granted€summary€judgment€to€respondents,€holding€the€punishments€andÐ ° Ðrestrictions€on€Appellant€did€not€impose€such€atypical€and€significant€hardships€as€to€create€a€libertyÐ œì Ðinterest€that€would€invoke€due€process€requirements.Ð ˆØ ÐÌÔ‡XAXXXAÔà  àThe€proper€method€for€judicial€review€of€a€prison€disciplinary€board€decision€is€by€petitionÐ `° Ðfor€common€law€writ€of€certiorari.€òòRhoden€v.€State€Depððt.€of€Correction,óó€984€S.W.2d€955,€956€(Tenn.Ð L œ ÐCt.€App.€1998)€(citing€òòBishop€v.€Conleyóó,€894€S.W.2d€294€(Tenn.€Cr.€App.€1994)).Ô#†XAXXXAü#Ô׃#×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Under€such€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðpetition,€a€courtððs€review€of€administrative€agency€decisions€is€very€limited.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ $ t Ð27-8-101€provides:€Ð  ` ÐÌà8  àThe€writ€of€certiorari€may€be€granted€whenever€authorized€by€law,€and€also€in€allÐ è 8  Ðcases€where€an€inferior€tribunal,€board,€or€officer€exercising€judicial€functions€hasÐ Ô$  Ðexceeded€the€jurisdiction€conferred,€or€is€acting€illegally,€when,€in€the€judgment€ofÐ À  Ðthe€court,€there€is€no€other€plain,€speedy,€or€adequate€remedy.€€ÓÓЬü Ð Ð  ÐÓÓà  àWhere€a€petitioner€challenges€the€correctness€of€the€decision€of€the€board€or€other€decision„Ð „Ô  Ðmaker,€the€common€law€writ€does€not€provide€a€remedy.€òòYokley€v.€Stateóó,€632€S.W.2d€123,€126Ð pÀ Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1981).€òòóó€Because€the€intrinsic€correctness€of€the€decision€of€the€lower€tribunal€is€notÐ \¬ Ðsubject€to€judicial€review,€€òòPowell€v.€Parole€Eligibility€Review€Bd.óó,€879€S.W.2d€871,€873€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð H˜ ÐApp.€1994),€the€scope€of€review€is€generally€limited€to€a€determination€of€whether€the€administrativeÐ 4„ Ðbody€acted€outside€its€jurisdiction€or€arbitrarily,€capriciously,€or€illegally.òò€€Cooper€v.€WilliamsonÐ  p ÐCounty€Bd.€of€Educ.óó,€746€S.W.2d€176,€179€(Tenn.€1987).òòóóÐ  \ ÐÌà  àThe€writ€itself€is€an€order€issued€by€a€superior€court€to€compel€an€inferior€tribunal€to€send€upÐ ä4 Ðits€record€for€review.€€òòPigg€v.€Casteelóó,€No.€01A01„9807„CH„0038,€1999€WL€166499,€at€*2€(Tenn.Ð Ð  ÐCt.€App.€Mar.€29,€1999)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)Ô‡XAXXXAÔ.€€In€order€to€warrant€issuance€ofÐ ¼  Ðthe€writ,€the€petition€must€sufficiently€allege€that€the€inferior€tribunal€acted€outside€its€jurisdiction,Ð ¨ø Ðillegally,€fraudulently,€or€arbitrarily.€€The€writ€of€certiorari€is€considered€an€extraordinary€remedy,Ð ”ä Ðand€it€is€not€available€as€of€right.€€òòClark€v.€Metro.€Govððt€of€Nashville€and€Davidson€Countyóó,€827Ð €Ð ÐS.W.2d€312,€316€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€Ô#†XAXXXAð#ÔÔ‡XAXXXAÔThe€decision€of€whether€to€grant€the€writ,€thus€compellingÐ l¼ Ðthe€filing€of€the€record€of€proceedings€below,€lies€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€Ð X ¨ ÐòòBoyce€v.€Williamsóó,€215€Tenn.€704,€713„14,€389€S.W.2d€272,€277€(1965).Ð D!” ÐÌà  àMr.€Ahkeen€alleges€that€he€received€a€letter€from€a€friend€who€was€incarcerated€in€anÐ #l! ÐArkansas€prison€asking€him€to€draft€a€letter€of€recommendation€for€parole€to€be€signed€by€theÐ $X" Ðfriendððs€mother„in„law.€€He€prepared€two€such€letters€and€sent€them€to€his€friend.€€Arkansas€prisonÐ ô$D # Ðofficials€intercepted€the€letters€and€notified€Tennessee€prison€officials.€€The€result€was€theÐ à%0!$ Ðdisciplinary€charge€and€proceeding.€€TDOC€Policy€502.05€IV€(L)€defines€the€offense€of€Ô_Ôð ðconspiracyÐ Ì&"% Ðto€violate€state€lawðð€as€ð ðtwo€or€more€persons,€each€having€the€culpable€mental€state€required€for€theÐ ° Ðoffense€which€is€the€object€of€the€conspiracy€and€each€acting€for€the€purpose€of€promoting€orÐ œì Ðfacilitating€the€commission€of€the€state€criminal€offense.ðð€€The€offense€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€was€charged€withÐ ˆØ Ðconspiring€to€commit€was€forgery€or€fraud.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€asserts€that€the€procedure€used€by€theÐ tÄ Ðdisciplinary€board€was€defective€and€denied€him€due€process€of€law.Ð `° ÐÔ#†XAXXXA #ÔÔ‡ XAXXXAÔÌà@’’#ìàI.€€Due€ProcessˆÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àAny€due€process€analysis€must€begin€with€a€determination€of€what€process,€if€any,€was€dueÐ  ` Ðin€the€circumstances€presented.€€The€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€several€times€discussed€theÐ ü L  Ðextent€of€the€due€process€guarantees€applicable€to€prison€disciplinary€proceedings€and€has€held€Ô#†XAXX XAM##ÔthatÐ è 8  Ðð ðprison€disciplinary€proceedings€are€not€part€of€a€criminal€prosecution,€and€the€full€panoply€of€rightsÐ Ô$  Ðdue€a€defendant€in€such€proceedings€does€not€apply.ðð€€€òòWolff€v.€McDonnellóó,€418€U.S.€539,€556,€94Ð À  ÐS.€Ct.€2963,€2975,€41€L.€Ed.€2d€935,€951€(1974)€(citing€òòÔ_ÔMorrisseyÔ_Ô€v.€Breweróó,€408€U.S.€at€488,€92€S.Ð ¬ü  ÐCt.€at€2603).€€In€òòWolffóó,€the€Court€recognized€that€the€unique€requirements€of€prison€life€necessarilyÐ ˜è  Ðinvolve€the€loss€by€prisoners€of€many€rights€afforded€to€Ô_ÔunincarceratedÔ_Ô€citizens.€€The€Court€also€Ð „Ô  Ðestablished€the€minimal€constitutional€requirements€which€must€be€met€in€prison€disciplinaryÐ pÀ Ðproceedings,€including€written€prior€notice€of€the€charges,€an€opportunity€to€present€witnesses€whenÐ \¬ Ðnot€hazardous€to€institutional€safety€and€goals,€an€impartial€decision€maker,€and€a€written€statementÐ H˜ Ðas€to€the€evidence€relied€on€and€the€reason€for€the€action€taken.€òò€Wolffóó,€418€U.S.€at€564„66,€94€S.€Ct.Ð 4„ Ð2978„79.Ð  p ÐÌà  àThe€United€States€Supreme€Court€later€limited€the€application€of€òòWolffóó,€essentially€holdingÐ øH Ðthat€a€prisonerððs€liberty€or€property€interest€is€not€sufficient€to€trigger€due€process€in€a€number€ofÐ ä4 Ðsituations€where€disciplinary€sanctions€are€imposed.€€An€inmate€is€only€entitled€to€the€limited€dueÐ Ð  Ðprocess€rights€provided€in€òòWolffóó€when€the€sanctions€impose€ð ðatypical€and€significant€hardship€on€theÐ ¼  Ðinmate€in€relation€to€the€ordinary€incidents€of€prison€life.ððòò€€Ô_ÔSandinÔ_Ô€v.€Conneróó,€515€U.S.€472,€483„85,Ð ¨ø Ð115,€S.€Ct.€2293,€2300„01(1995).€The€inmate€in€òòÔ_ÔSandinÔ_Ôóó€had€been€placed€in€punitive€segregation€forÐ ”ä Ðthirty€days€due€to€a€disciplinary€infraction.€€The€Court€held€that€those€who€are€incarcerated€pursuantÐ €Ð Ðto€a€valid€conviction€are€not€entitled€to€constitutional€due€process€in€prison€disciplinary€proceduresÐ l¼ Ðthat€result€in€brief€periods€of€disciplinary€segregation,€and€determined€that€thirty€days€was€a€briefÐ X ¨ Ðperiod.€€òòÔ_ÔSandinÔ_Ôóó,€515€U.S.€at€186,€115€S.€Ct.€at€2301.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àThis€court€has€applied€the€òòÔ_ÔSandinÔ_Ôóó€holding€to€various€types€of€sanctions,€finding€theseÐ #l! Ðsanctions€are€not€atypical€so€as€to€trigger€due€process.€€òòÔ_ÔDotsonÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ôóó,€No.€01A001„9811„CV„Ð $X" Ð00596,€1999€WL€430405,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€29,€1999)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€applicationÐ ô$D # Ðfiled)€(placement€in€five€day€segregated€confinement€suspended€for€sixty€days,€loss€of€six€monthsÐ à%0!$ Ðof€visitation€privileges,€and€payment€for€a€drug€screen);€òò€Mack€v.€Jonesóó,€No.€03A01„9806„CV„00215,Ð Ì&"% Ð1999€WL€172645,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Mar.€24,€1999)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)Ð ¸'#& Ð(transfer€to€a€more€secure€or€severe€prison€facility);€òòÔ_ÔBlackmonÔ_Ô€v.€Campbellóó,€No.€01A01„9807„CH„Ð ¤(ô#' Ð00361,€1999€WL€85518,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Feb.€23,€1999)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€applicationÐ )à$( Ðfiled)€(removal€from€a€prison€job);òòóó€òòHawkins€v.€Ô_ÔSundquistÔ_Ôóó,€No.€01A01„9803„CH„00164,€1999€WLÐ |*Ì%) Ð22386,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jan.€21,€1999)€(placement€of€prison€in€Ô_ÔlockdownÔ_Ô€status€due€to€violentÐ h+¸&* Ðincidents);€òòCompton€v.€Commissioneróó,€No.€01A01„9710„CH„00539,€1998€WL€195978,€at€*2€(Tenn.Ð ° ÐCt.€App.€April€24,€1998)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)€(reclassification€from€minimumÐ œì Ðsecurity€to€medium€security€status).Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€alleges€that€the€sanctions€given€him€by€the€disciplinary€board€òòóóincluded€five€daysÐ `° Ðin€punitive€segregation,€suspended€for€sixty€days,€and€a€$20.00€disciplinary€fee.€€As€the€trial€courtÐ L œ Ðdetermined,€the€punishments€imposed€on€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€do€not€constitute€an€€Ô‡ XAXXXAÔð ðatypical€and€significantÐ 8 ˆ Ðhardship€on€the€inmate€in€relation€to€the€ordinary€incidents€of€prison€life.ðð€€Therefore,€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_ÔÐ $ t Ðcan€claim€no€liberty€interest€to€which€due€process€attaches.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€alleges€that€the€loss€of€the€opportunity€to€earn€sentence€reduction€credits€is€aÐ è 8  Ðliberty€interest€triggering€due€process.€€He€has€not€alleged€that€the€sanctions€imposed€against€himÐ Ô$  Ðincluded€loss€of€accumulated€sentence€reduction€credits.€€This€court€has€determined€that€such€lossÐ À  Ðcan€implicate€an€interest€sufficient€to€invoke€due€process.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€òòÔ_ÔLivingstonÔ_Ô€v.€Board€of€Parolesóó,€No.Ð ¬ü  ÐM1999„01138„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2001€WL€747643€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July€5,€2001)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ð ˜è  Ð11€application€filed);òò€see€Greene€v.€Tennessee€Depððt.€of€Correctionóó,€No.€01A01„9608„CH„00370,Ð „Ô  Ð1998€WL€382204,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jul.€10,€1998)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)Ð pÀ Ð(prisoner€had€a€property€interest€in€accumulated,€or€already€earned,€good€and€honor€time€credits).€Ð \¬ ÐMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€argues,€however,€that€his€disciplinary€conviction€resulted€in€a€change€of€status€whichÐ H˜ Ðprevented€him€from€earning€sentence€reduction€credits€he€would€otherwise€have€been€eligible€toÐ 4„ Ðearn.€€For€example,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€41„21„236(4)€provides,€ð ðno€sentence€credits€for€institutionalÐ  p Ðbehavior€may€be€awarded€for€any€month€in€which€a€prisoner€commits€a€disciplinary€offense€of€whichÐ  \ Ðhe€is€found€guilty.ðð€€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€alleges€that€his€disciplinary€conviction,€therefore,€resulted€in€hisÐ øH Ðinability€to€earn€six€days€of€sentence€reduction€credits€by€operation€of€the€statute.€€He€also€allegesÐ ä4 Ðthat€his€disciplinary€conviction€included€a€change€in€security€status€which€will€result€in€his€loss€ofÐ Ð  Ðthe€opportunity€to€earn€another€72€days€of€sentence€reduction€credits€over€the€next€18€Ô_Ômonths.Ô_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÐ ¼  ÐÌà  àA€prisoner€has€no€right€to€sentence€reduction€credits;€ð ð[Ô_Ôs]uchÔ_Ô€sentence€credits€shall€not€beÐ ”ä Ðearned€or€credited€automatically,€but€rather€shall€be€awarded€on€a€monthly€basis€to€an€inmate€at€theÐ €Ð Ðdiscretion€of€the€responsible€warden€.€.€.€.ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€41„21„236(a)(2„3).€€Thus,€there€is€noÐ l¼ Ðcognizable€interest€in€unearned€sentence€credits.€The€due€process€clause€protects€ð ðonly€genuineÐ X ¨ Ðclaims€involving€pre„existing€entitlement€.€.€.€not€.€.€.€unilateral€expectations€or€abstract€needs€orÐ D!” Ðdesires.ððòò€€Ô_ÔKaylorÔ_Ô€v.€Bradleyóó,€912€S.W.2d€728,€735€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€A€similar€claim€was€madeÐ 0"€  Ðin€òòPerson€v.€Morganóó,€181€F.3d€103€(table),€1999€WL€282615€(6th€Cir.€1999)€(UNPUBLISHEDÐ #l! ÐOPINION),€wherein€the€prisoner€contended€that€the€sanction€of€segregation€he€received€for€aÐ $X" ÐÔ_Ôdisciplinary€infraction€affected€the€length€of€his€incarceration€because€he€could€not€earn€sentenceÐ ° Ðreduction€credits€while€in€segregation.€€The€court€found:Ð œì ÐÌà8  àPersonððs€claim€lacks€an€arguable€basis€in€law.€€First,€a€prisoner€has€no€inherentÐ tÄ Ðconstitutional€right€to€remain€free€of€administrative€segregation.€€Second,€unlessÐ `° ÐPersonððs€disciplinary€conviction€resulted€in€an€atypical€and€significant€hardship€onÐ L œ Ðhim€in€relation€to€the€ordinary€incidents€of€prison€life€or€will€inevitably€affect€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðduration€of€his€sentence,€he€lacks€the€liberty€interest€required€for€a€due€processÐ $ t Ðchallenge€to€his€conviction.€€Although€Person€argues€that€his€stay€in€segregation,Ð  ` Ðoccasioned€by€his€disciplinary€conviction,€precludes€his€opportunity€to€earn€sentenceÐ ü L  Ðreduction€credits€that€would€lead€to€an€earlier€release,€such€speculative,€collateralÐ è 8  Ðconsequences€of€a€prison€disciplinary€conviction€are€insufficient€to€create€a€libertyÐ Ô$  Ðinterest.ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€*1€(citations€omitted).Ð ˜è  ÐÌÔ#†XAXX XA7#Ôà  àThe€gravamen€of€Mr.€Ahkeenððs€claim€is€that€the€disciplinary€board€failed€to€follow€its€ownÐ pÀ Ðprocedures.€€It€is€well„settled€that€allegation€of€such€failure€does€not€invoke€due€processÐ \¬ Ðconsiderations.Ð H˜ ÐÌà8  àThus€language€in€state€laws€or€prison€regulations€no€longer€creates€a€liberty€interestÐ  p Ðprotected€by€the€Due€Process€Clause.€€Rather,€from€now€on,€when€analyzing€dueÐ  \ Ðprocess€claims€federal€courts€look€neither€to€state€laws€or€regulations€to€ascertainÐ øH Ðwhether€they€create€a€liberty€interest€in€connection€with€a€housing€assignment,Ð ä4 Ðimposition€of€administrative€or€disciplinary€segregation,€reclassification,€jobÐ Ð  Ðassignment,€or€a€prison€transfer,€nor€to€the€subjective€motives€of€prison€officials€forÐ ¼  Ðeffecting€such€changes.€€Instead,€the€Court€focuses€on€the€nature€of€the€deprivationÐ ¨ø Ðitself.ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌòòReinholz€v.€Campbellóó,€64€F.€Supp.€2d€721,€729€(W.D.€Tenn.€1999)€òòaffððdóó,€198€F.3d€247€(6th€Cir.Ð l¼ Ð1999).€€As€the€òòReinholzóó€court€observed,€after€òòSandinóó,€ð ðprisoners€may€no€longer€peruse€state€statutesÐ X ¨ Ðand€prison€regulations€searching€for€the€grail€of€limited€discretion.€€Instead,€a€prisoner€has€a€libertyÐ D!” Ðinterestðð€only€in€those€deprivations€described€in€òòSandinóó€as€imposing€atypical€and€significant€hardshipÐ 0"€  Ðon€the€inmate.€€After€òòSandinóó,€the€nature€of€the€deprivation€actually€imposed€is€the€appropriate€focusÐ #l! Ðfor€a€determination€of€whether€a€liberty€interest€is€implicated,€not€the€content€of€any€prisonÐ $X" Ðregulations.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àTherefore,€we€conclude€that€Mr.€Ahkeen€failed€to€allege€any€liberty€interest€subject€to€dueÐ Ì&"% Ðprocess€protections€and€his€petition€was€properly€dismissed€as€to€those€grounds.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌÌÌÔ_ÔÐ h+¸&* Їà@f f ìàII.€€ð ðIllegalityðð€Under€Common€Law€Writ€of€CertiorariˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àThis€court€has€held€that€the€common€law€writ€of€certiorari€is€available€to€correct€theÐ ˆØ Ðð ðessential€illegalityðð€of€a€denial€of€procedural€rights€guaranteed€by€the€federal€and€state€constitutions.€Ð tÄ ÐòòState€v.€Womackóó,€591€S.W.2d€437,€442€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1979).€€However,€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€maintains€thatÐ `° Ðby€failing€to€follow€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€disciplinary€policies,€the€board€acted€illegally,€regardless€of€whether€its€Ð L œ Ðactions€also€amounted€to€a€deprivation€of€constitutional€due€process.€€We€do€not€disagree€that€stateÐ 8 ˆ Ðlaw€can€create€remedies€which€are€additional€to€those€created€by€constitutional€provisions.€€Ð $ t ÐAdditionally,€we€do€not€disagree€that,€while€allegations€of€constitutional€violations€are€one€type€ofÐ  ` Ðð ðillegalityðð€supporting€judicial€review€by€common€law€writ€of€certiorari,€òòDavis€v.€Campbellóó,€No.Ð ü L  Ð01A01„9712„CH„00755,€1998€WL€812533,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Nov.€25,€1998)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.Ð è 8  ÐP.€11€application€filed)€(allegation€of€denial€of€due€process€is€allegation€that€the€board€and€wardenÐ Ô$  Ðacted€arbitrarily€and€illegally),€they€are€not€the€only€basis€for€a€claim€that€a€board€has€acted€illegally.€Ð À  ÐÔ‡ XAXXXAÔòòHoover€v.€Metro€Bd.€of€Zoning€Appeals,óó€924€S.W.2d€900,€905€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996)òò;€Ô_ÔHarlessÔ_Ô€v.€CityÐ ¬ü  Ðof€Kingsportóó,€No.€03A01„9707„CH„00289,€1998€WL€131519,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Mar.€25,€1998)Ð ˜è  Ð(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)€(giving€examples€of€circumstances€supporting€allegationsÐ „Ô  Ðof€illegal€or€arbitrary€board€action).€€Ô#†XAXX XA{X#ÔÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àHowever,€a€writ€of€certiorari€ð ðprovides€a€vehicle€for€a€court€to€remove€a€case€from€a€lowerÐ H˜ Ðtribunal€to€determine€whether€there€has€been€a€failure€to€proceed€according€to€the€essentialÐ 4„ Ðrequirements€of€the€law.ðð€€òòClarkóó,€827€S.W.2d€at€317€(concurring€opinion)€(citing€òòÔ_ÔGallatinÔ_Ô€BeerÐ  p ÐRegulation€Ô_ÔCommððnÔ_Ô€v.€Ogleóó,€185€Tenn.€482,€206€S.W.2d€891,€893€(1948)).€€Thus,€an€allegation€ofÐ  \ Ðillegality€sufficient€to€support€judicial€review€of€the€boardððs€decision€must€involve€a€failure€to€followÐ øH Ðð ðessential€requirements€of€the€law.ðð€€Ð ä4 ÐÌÔ‡ XAXXXAÔà8  àIt€must€be€borne€in€mind€that€the€functions€of€certiorari€are€simply€to€ascertain€theÐ ¼  Ðvalidity€of€proceedings€before€a€court€of€justice,€either€on€the€charge€of€theirÐ ¨ø Ðinvalidity,€because€the€essential€forms€of€the€law€have€not€been€observed,€or€on€thatÐ ”ä Ðof€the€want€of€jurisdiction€in€the€court€entertaining€them.€.€.€.€€Hence,€it€has€been€heldÐ €Ð Ðthat€the€supervisory€jurisdiction€of€the€court€on€a€certiorari€must€be€restricted€to€anÐ l¼ Ðexamination€into€the€external€validity€of€the€proceedings€had€in€the€lower€court.€.€.Ð X ¨ Ð.€€The€supervisory€powers€of€the€court€should€not€be€confounded€with€its€appellateÐ D!” Ðjurisdiction.Ð0"€ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòHoover€Motor€Express€Co.€v.€Railroad€&€Public€Utilities€Comm.óó,€195€Tenn.€593,€601,€261€S.W.2dÐ $X" Ð233,€236€(1953)€(citations€omitted).Ô#†XAXX XAp]#ÔÐ ô$D # ÐÌÔ‡XAXXXAÔà  àThe€Department€of€Correction€is€vested€with€the€management€and€government€of€stateÐ Ì&"% Ðprisons,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„6„102,€and€in€describing€this€grant€of€authority,€our€Supreme€CourtÔ#†XAXXXA‚a#ÔÔ‡XAXXXAÔÐ ¸'#& Ðhas€stated:Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÔ#†XAXXXAšb#ÔÌÐ  |*Ì%) Ðà8  àThe€legislature€has€provided€the€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€considerable€deference€and€broadÐ ° ÐÔ_ÔdscretionaryÔ_Ô€powers€to€enable€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€to€manage€its€tremendous€responsibilities€.€.€.Ð œì Ð.€€This€broad€grant€of€legislative€discretion€necessarily€includes€the€power€to€establishÐ ˆØ Ðpolicies€and€procedures€for€handling€disciplinary€matters.ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌòòMandela€v.€Campbellóó,€978€S.W.2d€531,€534€(Tenn.€1998).€€Pursuant€to€this€grant€of€authority,€theÐ L œ ÐDepartment€has€established€Uniform€Disciplinary€Procedures€whose€stated€purpose€is,€ð ðTo€provideÐ 8 ˆ Ðfor€the€fair€and€impartial€determination€and€resolution€of€all€disciplinary€charges€placed€againstÐ $ t Ðinmates€.€.€.€.ðð€€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€Pol.€&€Proc.€#€502.01€II.€€These€procedures€include€a€general€policy€statement:Ð  ` ÐÌà8  àFair€and€impartial€disciplinary€proceedings€will€be€administered€against€inmatesÐ è 8  Ðcharged€with€disciplinary€infractions.€€The€procedures€contained€herein€alone€shallÐ Ô$  Ðgovern€the€disciplinary€process.€€This€policy€is€not€intended€to€create€any€additionalÐ À  Ðdue€process€guarantees€for€inmates€beyond€those€which€are€constitutionally€required.€Ð ¬ü  ÐMinor€deviations€from€the€procedures€set€forth€below€shall€not€be€grounds€forÐ ˜è  Ðdismissal€of€a€disciplinary€offense€unless€the€inmate€is€able€to€show€some€prejudiceÐ „Ô  Ðas€a€result€and€the€error€would€have€affected€the€disposition€of€the€case.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌÔ_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€Pol.€&€Proc.€#€502.01€V.€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ôððs€specific€allegations€of€failure€to€follow€the€Departmentððs€procedures€includeÐ  p Ðan€assertion€that€his€disciplinary€hearing€was€held€more€than€seven€days€after€he€received€notice€ofÐ  \ Ðthe€charge€against€him,€in€violation€of€the€policy€which€states€that€ð ðno€inmate€charged€with€aÐ øH Ðdisciplinary€offense€should€be€required€to€wait€more€than€7€calendar€days€until€his€disciplinaryÐ ä4 Ðhearing€is€held,€unless€the€hearing€is€continued€pursuant€to€[procedures].€€Failure€to€comply€with€thisÐ Ð  Ðprovision€may€constitute€grounds€for€dismissal.ððÔ_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€made€a€pre„hearing€motion€to€dismissÐ ¼  Ðon€the€basis€of€this€policy,€and€the€denial€of€the€motion€is€another€ground€for€his€allegation€the€boardÐ ¨ø Ðfailed€to€follow€procedures.€€He€has€not€alleged€any€harm€to€him€from€the€slight€delay.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àHe€next€asserts€the€hearing€did€not€comply€with€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€procedures€because€it€was€held€byÐ l¼ Ðone€member€of€the€disciplinary€board.€€He€asserts€that€the€offense€with€which€he€was€charged€couldÐ X ¨ Ðhave€resulted€in€sanctions€which,€according€to€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€policies,€require€a€hearing€by€a€full€hearingÐ D!” Ðpanel.€€The€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€procedures€require€a€three„member€hearing€panel€for€hearings€on€certain€typesÐ 0"€  Ðof€offenses,€generally€those€with€more€severe€punishment.€€A€hearing€on€any€offense€which€mayÐ #l! Ðresult€in€loss€of€accumulated€sentence€credits€is€to€be€conducted€by€a€three„member€panel.€€However,Ð $X" Ðthe€procedures€specifically€provide€limitations€on€the€sanctions€which€may€be€imposed€by€any€panelÐ ô$D # Ðother€than€a€three„member€panel;€for€example,€any€recommendation€or€loss€of€accumulated€sentenceÐ à%0!$ Ðcredits€may€be€made€only€by€a€three„member€panel.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€does€not€allege€he€received€aÐ Ì&"% Ðsanction€that€was€not€within€the€authority€of€a€one„member€panel€to€impose€or€recommend.€€Instead,Ð ° Ðhe€argues€that€he€was€entitled€to€a€three„member€hearing€panel€because€he€could€have€received€thoseÐ œì Ðsanctions.€€€Again,€since€he€was€not€given€the€more€severe€sanctions,€he€has€not€alleged€how€he€wasÐ ˆØ Ðharmed€by€use€of€the€procedure€for€less€serious€offenses.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€also€asserts€that€the€one€member€of€the€board€who€conducted€his€hearing€shouldÐ L œ Ðnot€have€been€allowed€to€do€so€because€she€was€disqualified€by€a€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€policy€which€prohibitsÐ 8 ˆ Ðemployees€sitting€on€any€hearing€panel€when€he€or€she€has€a€personal€interest€in€the€outcome€of€theÐ $ t Ðcase.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€The€alleged€personal€interest€is€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€had€previously€filed€a€grievance€and€a€lawsuitÐ  ` Ðalleging€retaliation€for€the€grievance€against€several€prison€employees,€including€the€panel€memberððsÐ ü L  Ðhusband.Ô_Ô׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€does€not€make€any€other€allegations€about€the€ð ðpersonal€interestðð€of€the€boardÐ è 8  Ðmember.€€We€note€the€disciplinary€charges€herein€were€brought€by€other€employees€of€the€prison,Ð Ô$  Ðand€the€disciplinary€boardððs€decision€was€subject€to€appeal€to€the€warden.€The€policy€upon€whichÐ À  ÐMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€relies€provides€that€a€deputy€or€associate€warden€will€arbitrate€any€determinations€onÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€eligibility€of€a€particular€employee€to€participate€as€a€hearing€panel€member€in€a€particularÐ ˜è  Ðhearing.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€does€not€allege€that€he€asked€for€such€arbitration.€€In€fact,€he€did€not€raise€thisÐ „Ô  Ðissue€in€his€appeal€of€the€disciplinary€boardððs€decision€to€the€warden.Ð pÀ ÐÌÔ‡XAXXXAÔà  àWe€do€not€consider€these€allegations€of€failure€to€follow€internal€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€procedures€toÐ H˜ Ðamount€to€allegations€that€the€disciplinary€board€did€not€follow€the€essential€requirements€of€the€law.€Ð 4„ ÐIn€the€context€of€prison€disciplinary€proceedings,€both€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€and€the€UnitedÐ  p ÐStates€Supreme€Court€have€recognized€the€broad€discretion€necessary€to€allow€prison€officials€toÐ  \ Ðperform€their€responsibilities€and,€in€shaping€the€law€in€this€area,€have€also€taken€into€considerationÐ øH Ðthe€realities€of€life€in€prison.€€Ô#†XAXXXA®|#ÔCourts€have€€recognized€that€lawfully€convicted€prisoners€may€beÐ ä4 Ðsubjected€to€disciplinary€proceedings€which€do€not€ensure€ð ða€full€panoply€of€rights.ðð€òòWolffóó,€418€U.S.Ð Ð  Ðat€540,€94€S.€Ct.€at€2967.€€A€prisonerððs€interest€in€sanctions€which€may€be€imposed€pursuant€to€suchÐ ¼  Ðproceedings€is€a€liberty€or€property€interest,€and€that€interest€does€not€extend€to€sanctions€which€doÐ ¨ø Ðnot€ð ðimpose€atypical€and€significant€hardshipðð€beyond€the€ordinary€incidents€of€prison€life.€€òòÔ_ÔSandinÔ_Ôóó,Ð ”ä Ð115€S.€Ct.€at€2295.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€that€the€ð ðessential€requirements€of€the€lawðð€in€this€areaÐ €Ð Ðare€those€established€by€the€due€process€clause.€€Where€the€Tennessee€legislature€has€not€imposedÐ l¼ Ðmore€stringent€requirements€on€prison€disciplinary€procedures,׃ð×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€we€decline€to€do€so.€€Without€aÐ X ¨ Ðconstitutional€or€statutory€ð ðessential€requirementðð,€the€writ€of€certiorari€procedure€does€not€authorizeÐ D!” Ðcourts€to€create€one.€€Therefore,€a€failure€to€sufficiently€allege€a€due€process€violation€in€the€conductÐ 0"€  Ðof€prison€disciplinary€proceedings€is€also€a€failure€to€allege,€under€common€law€writ€of€certiorariÐ #l! Ðgrounds,€that€a€disciplinary€board€has€acted€illegally€by€not€following€the€essential€requirements€ofÐ ° Ðthe€law.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Accordingly,€allegations€that€the€board€acted€illegally€by€failing€to€follow€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_ÔÐ œì Ðprocedures€do€not,€in€and€of€themselves,€support€issuance€of€a€writ€of€certiorari€to€review€the€legalityÐ ˆØ Ðof€the€boardððs€decision.Ð tÄ ÐÌÓ  ÓIII.€€Material€EvidenceÐ L œ ÐÓE‡ÓÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€also€asserts€that€the€disciplinary€boardððs€finding€that€he€violated€a€department€Ð $ t Ðrule€is€not€supported€by€the€evidence.€€In€òòWolff€v.€McDonnellóó,€the€United€States€Supreme€CourtÐ  ` Ðdetermined€that€one€of€the€minimal€constitutional€requirements€applicable€to€prison€disciplinaryÐ ü L  Ðproceedings€is€a€written€statement€of€the€evidence€relied€on€and€the€reason€for€the€action€taken.€òòÐ è 8  ÐWolffóó,€418€U.S.€at€564„66,€94€S.€Ct.€at€2978„80.€€In€òòSuperintendent€v.€Hillóó,€the€Court€determined€thatÐ Ô$  Ðð ðthe€minimum€requirements€of€procedural€due€processðð,€where€due€process€attaches,€include€aÐ À  Ðrequirement€that€the€findings€of€a€prison€disciplinary€board€be€supported€by€some€evidence€in€theÐ ¬ü  Ðrecord.€€òòHillóó,€472€U.S.€at€454,€105€S.€Ct.€at€2773.€€As€discussed€above,€the€Court€also€determined€inÐ ˜è  ÐòòÔ_ÔSandinÔ_Ôóó€that€due€process€is€not€implicated€by€all€actions€taken€by€a€prison€disciplinary€board,€and€weÐ „Ô  Ðhave€determined€that€the€deprivations€alleged€by€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô€are€not€the€type€triggering€a€dueÐ pÀ Ðprocess€analysis.€€Nonetheless,€the€United€States€Supreme€Courtððs€discussion€of€the€due€processÐ \¬ Ðrequirement€that€some€evidence€support€a€disciplinary€boardððs€determination€provides€insight€whichÐ H˜ Ðis€relevant€to€our€discussion€of€a€similar€state€law€requirement.€€In€òòSuperintendent€v.€Hillóó,€the€CourtÐ 4„ Ðexamined€the€standard€that€due€process€is€met€ð ðif€there€was€some€evidence€from€which€theÐ  p Ðconclusion€of€the€administrative€tribunal€could€be€deduced.ððòò€€Hillóó,€472€U.S.€at€455,€105€S.€Ct.€atÐ  \ Ð2774.€€The€Court,€declining€to€adopt€a€more€stringent€evidentiary€standard€as€a€constitutionalÐ øH Ðrequirement,€stated:Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àAscertaining€whether€this€standard€is€satisfied€does€not€require€examination€of€theÐ ¼  Ðentire€record,€independent€assessment€of€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€or€weighing€ofÐ ¨ø Ðthe€evidence.€€Instead,€the€relevant€question€is€whether€there€is€any€evidence€in€theÐ ”ä Ðrecord€that€could€support€the€conclusion€reached€by€the€disciplinary€board.€.€.€.€€TheÐ €Ð Ðfundamental€fairness€guaranteed€by€the€Due€Process€Clause€does€not€require€courtsÐ l¼ Ðto€set€aside€decisions€of€prison€administrators€that€have€some€basis€in€fact.ÐX ¨Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àUnder€state€law,€one€of€the€questions€raised€by€an€allegation€that€a€board€or€commission€actedÐ $X" Ðillegally€or€arbitrarily€is€whether€the€record€contains€any€material€evidence€to€support€the€decisionÐ ô$D # Ðbelow.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€òòDavison€v.€Carróó,€659€S.W.2d€361,€363€(Tenn.€1983);€òòHoover€v.€Metropolitan€Bd.€ofÐ à%0!$ ÐÔ_ÔHousing€Appealsóó,€936€S.W.2d€950,€954€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996);€òòMetropolitan€Air€Research€TestingÐ ° ÐAuth.,€Inc.€V.€Metropolitan€Govððt.€of€Nashville€and€Davidson€Countyóó,€842€S.W.2d€611,€619€(Tenn.Ð œì ÐCt.€App.€1992).€€Absent€some€material€evidence,€the€petitioner€is€entitled€to€relief€under€the€commonÐ ˆØ Ðlaw€writ€of€certiorari.€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àHowever,€any€such€judicial€review€is€limited€to€finding€some€evidentiary€basis,€and€ð ðneitherÐ L œ Ðthe€trial€court€nor€this€court€determines€any€disputed€question€of€fact€or€weighs€any€evidence.ðð€Ð 8 ˆ ÐòòGallatin€Housing€Auth.€v.€City€Council,€City€of€Gallatinóó,€868€S.W.2d€278,€280€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð $ t Ð1993).€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€explained,€ð ðThe€scope€of€review€under€the€common€lawÐ  ` Ðwrit€does€not€ordinarily€extend€to€a€redetermination€of€the€facts€found€by€the€administrative€body.ðð€òòÐ ü L  ЀCooper,€óó746€S.W.2d€at€179.òòóó€€Further,Ð è 8  ÐÌÔ‡ XAXXXAÔà8  àThe€writ€has€never€been€employed€to€inquire€into€the€correctness€of€the€judgmentÐ À  Ðrendered€where€the€court€had€jurisdiction,€and€was€therefore€competent.€€Hence€it€hasÐ ¬ü  Ðbeen€held€that€the€supervisory€jurisdiction€of€the€court€on€a€certiorari€.€.€.€cannot€beÐ ˜è  Ðexercised€to€review€the€judgment€as€to€its€intrinsic€correctness,€either€on€the€law€orÐ „Ô  Ðon€the€facts€of€the€case.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐòòÌHoover€Motor€Express€Co.óó,€195€Tenn.€at€601,€€261€S.W.2d€at€236€(citations€omitted).€€In€otherÐ H˜ Ðwords,€ð ðit€is€not€the€correctness€of€the€decision€that€is€subject€to€judicial€review,€but€the€manner€inÐ 4„ Ðwhich€the€decision€is€reached.ððòò€€Powell€v.€Parole€Eligibility€Bd.óó,€879€S.W.2d€871,€873€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð  p ÐApp.€1997).Ô#†XAXX XA’˜#ÔÐ  \ ÐÌà  àThe€appellees€filed€the€record€of€the€disciplinary€proceeding.׃À ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Mr.€Ahkeen€also€filed€theÐ ä4 Ðrecord,€or€parts€thereof,€as€attachments€to€his€pleadings.€€The€notice€of€charges€states€thatÐ Ð  Ðinformation€was€received€from€the€Arkansas€prison€system€confirming€that€Mr.€Ahkeen€and€anÐ ¼  ÐArkansas€inmate€were€conspiring€to€commit€fraud€by€falsifying€documents€for€the€other€inmateððsÐ ¨ø Ðparole€consideration.€According€to€the€hearing€report,€the€charging€officer€testified€at€the€Ô_Ôhearing.Ð ”ä ÐBoth€the€report€and€Mr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ôððs€appeal€state€that€the€letter€of€recommendation€and€a€personal€letter€Ð ° Ðto€his€friend,€the€Arkansas€inmate,€were€presented€as€evidence€at€the€hearing.€€Thus,€there€was€someÐ œì Ðevidence€presented.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ôððs€appeal€states€his€real€claim:€that€there€was€no€evidence€of€his€intent€to€conspireÐ `° Ðto€commit€fraud€or€forgery.€€That€claim€is€essentially€an€allegation€that€the€board€made€incorrectÐ L œ Ðinferences€or€reached€incorrect€conclusions€based€on€the€evidence€that€was€presented.€€We€interpretÐ 8 ˆ Ðthat€claim€to€be€an€attack€on€the€intrinsic€correctness€of€the€boardððs€decision.€€As€such,€it€does€notÐ $ t Ðconstitute€a€ground€for€relief€under€the€common€law€writ€of€certiorari.€€Where€the€essence€of€theÐ  ` Ðcomplaint€is€an€attack€on€the€correctness€of€the€boardððs€decision,€dismissal€is€warranted.€€òòTurner€v.Ð ü L  ÐTennessee€Bd.€of€Parolesóó,€993€S.W.2d€78,€80€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999).€€Neither€the€trial€court€nor€thisÐ è 8  Ðcourt€is€authorized€to€weigh€the€evidence€or€to€substitute€its€judgment€for€that€of€the€board.€Ð Ô$  ÐòòÔ_ÔMcCullenÔ_Ô€v.€City€of€Memphisóó,€786€S.W.2d€633,€642€(Tenn.€1990).Ð À  ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari.€€CostsÐ ˜è  Ðare€taxed€to€the€appellant,€El„Ô_ÔShabazzÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAhkeenÔ_Ô.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð 4„ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGE