ÿWPCe= á꛾ ¦‡‡˜ßgIp0ªõð2%V€ú+E¢ctŸ,4ІÈ_°«HöÓ.ÐòVé“*¢ÝÚT­*Ï´>D²(ißÕ×X;ý¥£…GÑÚ$è;!s<£ã"ZÂæˆr,Ñw Ç'ÿµ£Ùh+Ž&* Ðaffirmatively€appears€that€the€trial€courtððs€decision€was€against€logic€or€reasoning,€and€caused€anÐ ),y'+ Ðinjustice€or€injury€to€the€complaining€party.€€òòMarcus€v.€Marcusóó,€993€S.W.2d€596,€601€(Tenn.€1999);Ð ° ÐòòDouglas€v.€Estate€of€Robertsonóó,€876€S.W.2d€95,€97€(Tenn.€1994).Ð ›ë ÐÌà  àThe€scope€of€review€under€a€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€is€extremely€limited.€€Courts€mayÐ qÁ Ðnot:€(1)€inquire€into€the€intrinsic€correctness€of€the€lower€tribunalððs€decision;€òòArnold€v.€TennesseeÐ \¬ ÐBd.€of€Parolesóó,€956€S.W.2d€478,€480€(Tenn.€1997);€òòPowell€v.€Parole€Eligibility€Rev.€Bdóó.,€879Ð G — ÐS.W.2d€871,€873€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994);€(2)€reweigh€the€evidence,€òòWatts€v.€Civil€Serv.€Bd.€forÐ 2 ‚ ÐColumbiaóó,€606€S.W.2d€274,€277€(Tenn.€1980);€òòHoover,€Inc.€v.€Metropolitan€Bd.€of€Zoning€App.óó,€924Ð  m ÐS.W.2d€900,€904€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996);€or€(3)€substitute€their€judgment€for€that€of€the€lowerÐ  X Ðtribunal.€€òò421€Corp.€v.€Metropolitan€Govððtóó,€36€S.W.3d€469,€474€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000).€€Rather,€theÐ ó C  Ðwrit€permits€the€courts€to€examine€the€lower€tribunalððs€decision€to€determine€whether€the€tribunalÐ Þ .  Ðexceeded€its€jurisdiction€or€acted€illegally,€fraudulently,€or€arbitrarily.€€òòTurner€v.€Tennessee€Bd.€ofÐ É  ÐParolesóó,€993€S.W.2d€78,€80€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999);€òòDaniels€v.€Traughberóó,€984€S.W.2d€918,€924Ð ´  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).Ð Ÿï  ÐÌà  àThe€writ€itself€is€an€order€issued€by€a€superior€court€to€compel€an€inferior€tribunal€to€send€upÐ uÅ  Ðits€record€for€review.€€In€order€to€warrant€issuance€of€the€writ,€the€petition€must€sufficiently€allegeÐ `° Ðthat€the€inferior€tribunal€acted€outside€its€jurisdiction,€illegally,€fraudulently,€or€arbitrarily.€€In€theÐ K› Ðcase€before€us,€the€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari€was€met€with€a€motion€to€dismiss,€pursuant€to€Tenn.Ð 6† ÐR.€Civ.€P.€12.02(6),€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€can€be€granted.€€Because€theÐ !q Ðpetition€merely€seeks€the€filing€of€the€record€and€judicial€review€of€the€proceedings€and€decision,€aÐ  \ Ðmotion€to€dismiss€it€at€this€stage€can€only€be€granted€if€the€petition€fails€to€make€any€allegationsÐ ÷G Ðwhich€justify€review€of€the€record€under€the€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€standards.€€In€determiningÐ â2 Ðthe€sufficiency€of€the€allegations,€conclusory€allegations€will€not€entitle€a€petitioner€to€the€writ,€andÐ Í Ðð ðif€the€agency€or€board€has€reached€its€decision€in€a€constitutional€or€lawful€manner,€then€theÐ ¸ Ðdecision€would€not€be€subject€to€judicial€review.ðð€€òòPowellóó,€879€S.W.2d€at€873.€€In€addition,€becauseÐ £ó Ðthe€writ€was€not€issued,€the€record€of€the€proceedings€below€was€not€filed,€was€not€before€the€trialÐ ŽÞ Ðcourt,€and€is€not€before€us.Ð yÉ ÐÌà  àAs€stated€above,€we€must€take€the€allegations€of€Mr.€Tankeslyððs€petition€as€true,€and€becauseÐ OŸ Ðno€record€was€filed€by€the€Department,€we€will€also€take€as€true€information€gleaned€from€thoseÐ : Š Ðportions€of€the€record€Mr.€Tankesly€attached€to€his€petition.€€Mr.€Tankesly€states€that€he€was€talkingÐ %!u Ðto€another€inmate€in€the€recreation€yard,€ð ðwhen€out€of€no€where,€this€inmate€[Mr.€Keil]€swung€at€meÐ "`  Ðin€an€attempt€to€assault€me,€a€fight€subsequently€followed.ðð€€Both€inmates€were€segregated€pendingÐ û"K! Ða€disciplinary€hearing.Ð æ#6" ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€asserts€that€the€chairman€of€the€disciplinary€board€entered€the€segregation€unitÐ ¼% !$ Ðthe€next€day€ð ðfor€the€purpose€of€conducting€a€disciplinary€hearing,ðð€but€that€the€hearing€wasÐ §&÷!% Ðcontinued€for€two€days€without€a€request€for€a€continuance€from€either€inmate€involved€in€the€fight.Ð ’'â"& ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€also€asserts€that€Mr.€Keil€pled€guilty€at€his€hearing€and€also€ð ðinformed€InternalÐ h)¸$( Ðâ âAffairs€that€he€was€responsible€for€the€initiation€of€this€fight.ðð€€According€to€Mr.€Tankesly,€Mr.€KeilÐ S*£%) Ðreceived€ten€days€in€segregation€as€sanctions,€without€credit€for€the€three€days€he€had€already€servedÐ ° Ðin€segregation€pending€the€hearing.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ›ë Ðâ âÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€alleges€that€at€his€own€hearing€he€was€advised€by€the€chair€of€the€board,Ð qÁ Ðthrough€his€inmate€advisor,€that€ð ðIf€I€did€not€plead€guilty€to€fighting,€I€would€be€charged€with€AssaultÐ \¬ Ðand€reclassified.ðð€€He€alleges€he€pled€guilty€to€fighting€and€received€ten€days€in€segregation€withoutÐ G — Ðcredit€for€the€three€days€he€spent€in€segregation€awaiting€the€hearing.€€Mr.€Tankesly€was€also€orderedÐ 2 ‚ Ðto€pay€half€the€medical€costs€that€resulted€from€the€fight.Ð  m ÐÌà  àThe€day€after€the€hearing,€Mr.€Tankesly€and€Mr.€Keil€wrote€to€the€warden€asking€him€toÐ ó C  Ðoverride€the€disciplinary€board€chairmanððs€refusal€to€give€them€credit€off€their€ten€days€sanctions€forÐ Þ .  Ðthe€three€days€they€had€spent€in€segregation€prior€to€the€hearing.€€Mr.€Tankesly€asserts€he€never€gotÐ É  Ða€response€to€this€letter.€€Mr.€Tankesly€also€sent€a€separate€letter€to€the€warden€requesting€that€theÐ ´  Ðwarden€override€the€boardððs€requirement€that€he€pay€half€the€medical€costs€on€the€basis€that€Mr.€KeilÐ Ÿï  Ðhad€admitted€to€Internal€Affairs€ð ðthat€he€started€this€fight.ðð€Ð ŠÚ  ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€has€included€a€copy€of€the€hearing€summary€from€his€disciplinary€hearingÐ `° Ðwhich€indicates€he€was€assisted€by€an€inmate€advisor€at€the€hearing€and€that€he€pled€guilty.€€HeÐ K› Ðsigned€a€statement€that€he€understood€that€by€entering€a€plea€of€guilty€he€was€waiving€his€right€to€callÐ 6† Ðwitnesses€and€present€evidence€and€that€he€ð ðmust€accept€whatever€punishment€is€imposed,€and€willÐ !q Ðnot€be€allowed€to€appeal.ðð€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àThe€hearing€summary€also€contained€the€following€entry€in€the€line€marked€statement€of€theÐ â2 Ðaccused:€ð ðInmate€Tankesly€pled€guilty€and€stated€he€was€involved€in€a€fight€with€Keil.€€Tankesly€alsoÐ Í Ðstated€the€problem€is€over.ðð€€This€entry€was€apparently€made€by€the€disciplinary€board€chairman€whoÐ ¸ Ðsigned€the€summary,€Sergeant€Pugh.€€Under€Disposition€and€Statement€of€Reasons,€€the€guilty€pleaÐ £ó Ðis€cited€as€support€for€a€finding€of€guilty€of€fighting.€In€addition,€the€following€appears€as€support:Ð ŽÞ Ðð ðTankeslyððs€statement€he€was€involved€in€fight€with€Keil.ðð€€With€regard€to€the€reasons€supportingÐ yÉ Ðthe€punishment,€the€statement€cites€the€seriousness€of€the€incident.Ð d´ ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€also€attached€to€his€petition€the€letter€to€Warden€Bowlen€signed€by€both€Mr.Ð : Š ÐTankesly€and€Mr.€Keil.€€In€pertinent€part,€it€states,€ð ðà8 @Ð àHaving€waived€our€right€to€appeal€the€guiltyÐ %!u Ðpleas,€we€would€like€to€invoke€our€right€to€appeal€the€ð ðExcessive€Punishmentðð€of€(10€days)€withoutÐ "`  Ðcredit€for€3€days€already€served.ðð€€The€letter€asks€the€warden€to€review€the€ten€day€segregation€ð ðwhenÐ û"K! Ðthe€standard€punishment€for€this€infraction€has€been€documented€to€be€5€daysðð€and€to€authorize€creditÐ æ#6" Ðfor€three€days€served€in€segregation€while€awaiting€a€hearing€which€was€continued€without€a€requestÐ Ñ$! # Ðfrom€either€inmate.Ð ¼% !$ ÐÌà  àSimilarly,€Mr.€Tankesly€attached€to€his€petition€the€letter€he€wrote€separately€to€the€warden,Ð ’'â"& Ðwherein€he€asks€the€warden€to€review€and€reverse€the€assessment€of€half€the€medical€costs€resultingÐ }(Í#' Ðfrom€the€fight€to€him€on€the€basis€that€Mr.€Keil€had€admitted€to€an€officer€in€Internal€Affairs€that€heÐ ° Ðhad€initiated€the€fight.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€that€letter,€he€also€asserts€he€was€told€by€Roger€Adams,€his€inmateÐ ›ë Ðadvisor,€that€if€he€did€not€plead€guilty,€Sgt.€Pugh€would€continue€the€hearing€and€pursue€an€assaultÐ †Ö Ðcharge€against€him.€€The€letter€states,€ð ðI€entered€a€guilty€plea€under€the€premise€that€I€would€get€10Ð qÁ Ðdays€with€credit.€€Upon€entering€this€plea,€Sgt.€Pugh€ordered€me€to€10€days€seg.€without€credit€inÐ \¬ Ðaddition€to€paying€ðð€of€Teddy€Keilððs€medical€bill.ððÐ G — ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€also€filed€with€his€petition€two€affidavits,€one€from€himself€and€one€from€RogerÐ  m ÐAdams.€€Both€include€the€basic€allegations€that€Sgt.€Pugh€told€Mr.€Adams€to€advise€Mr.€TankeslyÐ  X Ðthat€if€he€did€not€plead€guilty,€he€would€face€a€charge€of€assault€ð ðwith€the€certainty€of€beingÐ ó C  Ðreclassified.ðð€In€addition,€Mr.€Tankeslyððs€affidavit€alleges€that€it€was€the€assessment€of€half€theÐ Þ .  Ðmedical€costs€and€the€failure€to€receive€credit€for€the€three€days€he€was€in€segregation€that€were€theÐ É  Ðviolations€of€his€constitutional€rights€because€the€fight€resulted€from€Mr.€Keilððs€actions.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ´  ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€also€listed€in€his€petition,€the€names€and€other€information€about€eight€otherÐ ŠÚ  Ðprisoners€who,€he€alleges,€were€given€credit€on€their€disciplinary€board€sanctions€for€time€spent€inÐ uÅ  Ðsegregation€prior€to€the€hearing€and€five€who,€he€alleges,€were€not€required€to€pay€medical€costs€forÐ `° Ðfighting.Ð K› ÐÌà  àThe€petition€requested€that€the€court€order€the€record€filed€and,€after€review,€determine€thatÐ !q Ðhe€had€suffered€violations€of€both€his€due€process€rights€and€his€equal€protection€rights.€€He€askedÐ  \ Ðthat€the€court€order€that€the€guilty€finding€for€fighting€be€stricken€from€his€record,€that€theÐ ÷G Ðrequirement€that€he€pay€one„half€the€medical€expenses€incurred€due€to€injuries€from€the€fight€beÐ â2 Ðreversed,€and€that€the€$4.00€fee׃ì×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€charged€to€him€be€returned€to€his€trust€fund€account.€€Ð Í ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€determined€that€Mr.€Tankesly€had€no€protected€liberty€interest€entitling€himÐ £ó Ðto€due€process€protections€because€the€total€of€thirteen€days€in€segregation€was€within€the€range€ofÐ ŽÞ Ðconfinement€to€be€normally€expected€in€the€context€of€prison€life.€€The€trial€court€did€not€separatelyÐ yÉ Ðaddress€Mr.€Tankeslyððs€equal€protection€arguments.€€Neither€did€the€Department€at€the€trial€court€orÐ d´ Ðon€appeal.Ð OŸ ÐÌÌÌÐ û"K! ЇÓ  ÓII.€€Proper€PartiesÐ ° ÐÓOÓÌà  àWe€first€consider€the€issue€of€who€are€proper€defendants€or€respondents€in€a€challenge€to€aÐ †Ö Ðprison€disciplinary€decision.€€The€issue€arose€herein€because€Mr.€Tankesly€named€as€defendants€Sgt.€Ð qÁ ÐPugh,€the€disciplinary€board€chairman,€and€James€Bowlen,€the€warden€of€Southeastern€TennesseeÐ \¬ ÐState€Regional€Correctional€Facility.€€The€defendants€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€and€tÔ‡Xí0XXXí0Ôhe€trial€courtÐ G — Ðdismissed€Mr.€Tankeslyððs€causes€of€action€against€individuals€Sgt.€Pugh€and€Warden€Bowlen€basedÐ 2 ‚ Ðon€an€interpretation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„104,€which€outlines€the€procedural€framework€forÐ  m Ðreview€under€a€common„law€writ€of€certiorari.€€The€court€determined€that€the€only€proper€respondentÐ  X Ðwas€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction,€not€the€individual€board€or€commission€members.€€OnÐ ó C  Ðappeal,€Mr.€Tankesly€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€these€rulings.Ð Þ .  ÐÌà  àThe€State€argued€in€its€motion€to€dismiss€that€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„104Ô#†Xí0XXXí0Q#ÔÔ‡Xí0XXXí0Ô,€the€onlyÐ ´  Ðproper€defendant€in€a€case€of€this€sort€is€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction.€€We€have€recentlyÐ Ÿï  Ðheld€that€ð ðthis€argument€sweeps€too€broadly€and€that,€depending€on€the€circumstances,€parties€otherÐ ŠÚ  Ðthan€the€Department€may€properly€be€named€as€defendants.ðð€€òòRobinson€v.€Clementóó,€65€S.W.3d€632,Ð uÅ  Ð635„36€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001)€(citing€òòSeals€v.€Bowlenóó,€M1999„00997„COA„R3„CV,€2001€Tenn.€App.Ð `° ÐLEXIS€547,€at€*10„14,€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July€26,€2001)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)Ð K› Ð(holding€that€in€a€prison€discipline€case€both€the€disciplinary€board€and€the€warden€were€properÐ 6† Ðparties€because€each€of€them€had€decision„making€authority€in€the€disciplinary€process)).€Ð !q ÐThroughout€his€òòpro€seóó€pleadings,€Mr.€Tankesly€referred€to€Sgt.€Pughððs€actions€as€those€of€theÐ  \ Ðchairman€of€the€disciplinary€board€and€Warden€Bowlenððs€actions€as€those€taken€in€his€officialÐ ÷G Ðcapacity€as€warden.€€Thus,€Mr.€Tankesly€did€not€sue€Sgt.€Pugh€and€Warden€Bowlen€in€theirÐ â2 Ðindividual€capacities,€but€in€their€capacities€as€officials€with€a€role€in€imposing€punishment€upon€himÐ Í Ðas€an€inmate€in€custody€of€the€Department€of€Correction.Ð ¸ ÐÔ#†Xí0XXXí0 T#ÔÔ‡Xí0XXXí0ÔÌà  àWe€can€come€to€no€other€conclusion€but€that€Warden€Bowlen€is€a€proper€party€to€the€suit.€Ð ŽÞ ÐOne€of€Mr.€Tankeslyððs€claims€is€that€he€appealed€the€denial€of€three€days€credit€for€pre„hearingÐ yÉ Ðsegregation€to€the€Warden,€who€denied€him€relief.€€òòSealsóó,€2001€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€547,€at€*10„14.€Ð d´ ÐWith€regard€to€Sgt.€Pugh,€we€have€held€that€the€disciplinary€board,€whether€named€as€the€board€orÐ OŸ Ðby€listing€its€members€and€identifying€them€as€the€board,€is€a€proper€defendant€because€it€is€the€boardÐ : Š Ðor€commission€whose€decision€is€being€challenged.€òò€Idóó.€€We€see€no€significant€difference€whichÐ %!u Ðwould€amount€to€a€fatal€flaw€in€naming€the€chair€of€the€board€or€the€hearing€officer€instead€of€theÐ "`  Ðboard€itself€or€all€the€board€members.€€The€object€of€a€common„law€writ€of€certiorari€is€to€seekÐ û"K! Ðreview€of€the€boardððs€decision.€€The€petition€puts€the€board€or€commission€on€notice€to€file€theÐ æ#6" Ðrecord€of€the€decision€or€otherwise€respond.€€There€is€no€claim€herein€and€nothing€in€the€record€toÐ Ñ$! # Ðindicate€that€appropriate€officials€were€unaware€of€the€petition€or€the€claims€therein.€€Pursuant€toÐ ¼% !$ Ðprevious€decisions€rendered€by€this€court,€we€disagree€with€the€trial€court€in€that€the€TennesseeÐ §&÷!% ÐDepartment€of€Correction€is€the€only€proper€party€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„9„104.€€òòSee,€e.g.,óóÐ ’'â"& Ðâ âòòRobinson€v.€Clementóó,€65€S.W.3d€at€635„36;€òòSealsóó,€2001€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€547,€at€*10„14.€Ô#†Xí0XXXí0ÐY#ÔÔ‡Xí0XXXí0ÔòòÐ }(Í#' ÐóóAccordingly,€we€reverse€the€dismissal€of€Warden€Ô_ÔBowlenÔ_Ô€and€Sgt.€Ô_ÔPughÔ_Ô€in€their€official€capacities,Ð ° Ðand€we€proceed€to€the€substance€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔTankeslyÔ_Ôððs€claim.Ô#†Xí0XXXí0¡`#Ô׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô‡Xí0XXXí0ÔÐ ›ë Ðâ âÔ#†Xí0XXXí0cb#ÔÌÓ  ÓIII.€€The€Guilty€PleaÐ qÁ ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àÔ‡Xí0XXXí0ÔIn€the€case€before€us,€Mr.€Ô_ÔTankeslyÔ_Ô€asserts€that€the€chairman€of€the€disciplinary€board€actedÐ G — Ðarbitrarily€and€illegally,€depriving€him€of€due€process,€by€extorting€him€to€plead€guilty€on€the€chargeÐ 2 ‚ Ðof€fighting€after€being€threatened€with€harsher€punishment.Ô#†Xí0XXXí0c#ÔÐ  m ÐÌà  àAny€due€process€analysis€must€begin€with€a€determination€of€what€process,€if€any,€was€dueÐ ó C  Ðin€the€circumstances€presented.€€The€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€several€times€discussed€theÐ Þ .  Ðextent€of€the€due€process€guarantees€applicable€to€prison€disciplinary€proceedings€and€has€held€Ô‡Xí0XXXí0ÔthatÐ É  Ðð ðprison€disciplinary€proceedings€are€not€part€of€a€criminal€prosecution,€and€the€full€panoply€of€rightsÐ ´  Ðdue€a€defendant€in€such€proceedings€does€not€apply.ðð€€òòWolff€v.€McDonnellóó,€418€U.S.€539,€556,€94Ð Ÿï  ÐS.€Ct.€2963,€2975€(1974)€(citing€òòÔ_ÔMorrisseyÔ_Ô€v.€Breweróó,€408€U.S.€at€411,€480,€92€S.€Ct.€2593,€2600Ð ŠÚ  Ð(1972)).€€In€òòWolffóó,€the€Court€recognized€that€the€unique€requirements€of€prison€life€necessarilyÐ uÅ  Ðinvolve€the€loss€by€prisoners€of€many€rights€afforded€to€Ô_ÔunincarceratedÔ_Ô€citizens.€€The€Court€also€Ð `° Ðestablished€the€minimal€constitutional€requirements€which€must€be€met€in€prison€disciplinaryÐ K› Ðproceedings,€where€a€liberty€interest€is€implicated.€€Those€rights€include€written€prior€notice€of€theÐ 6† Ðcharges,€an€opportunity€to€present€witnesses€when€not€hazardous€to€institutional€safety€and€goals,Ð !q Ðan€impartial€decision€maker,€and€a€written€statement€as€to€the€evidence€relied€on€and€the€reason€forÐ  \ Ðthe€action€taken.€òò€Wolffóó,€418€U.S.€at€564„66,€94€S.€Ct.€at€2978„79.€€We€note€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔTankeslyÔ_Ô€hasÐ ÷G Ðnot€alleged€deprivation€of€any€of€these€rights€and€his€filings€would€not€support€any€such€allegation.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рâ2 ÐIn€òòÔ_ÔHitsonÔ_Ô€v.€Bradleyóó,€No.€01„A„01„9403„CH„00129,€1994€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€442,€at€*7„8€(Tenn.Ð Í ÐCt.€App.€Aug.€12,€1994)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)ò òó ó,€this€court€found€that€òòWolff€óódidÐ ¸ Ðnot€require€that€prisoners€receive€advance€notice€of€the€sanctions€which€will€be€imposed€after€a€guiltyÐ £ó Ðplea€in€a€prison€disciplinary€proceeding.Ð ŽÞ ÐÔ#†Xí0XXXí0f#ÔÔ‡Xí0XXXí0ÔÌÔ#†Xí0XXXí0"n#Ôà  àThe€gist€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔTankeslyÔ_Ôððs€petition€is€a€request€that€the€court€set€aside€the€consequences€ofÐ d´ Ðhis€guilty€plea.€€He€did€not€ask€the€warden€to€take€the€same€action,€instead€specificallyÐ OŸ ÐÔ_Ôacknowledging€he€had€waived€the€right€to€appeal€the€decision€of€guilt.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€That€acknowledgmentÐ ° Ðreflects€his€knowledge€of€the€Department€of€Correction€disciplinary€procedures€which€provide,€inÐ ›ë Ðpertinent€part,€that€the€disciplinary€board€chairman€or€hearing€officer€is€to€make€certain€inquiries€andÐ †Ö Ðreflect€the€answers€to€those€inquires€in€the€boardððs€findings.€€Included€among€those€are:Ð qÁ ÐÌà8  àWhether€any€inmate€entering€a€plea€of€guilty€has€been€advised€and€understands€thatÐ G — Ðby€so€doing,€he/she€is€waiving€the€right€to€call€witness(es)€on€his€behalf,€to€crossÐ 2 ‚ Ðexamine€his/her€accuser€and€any€hostile€witnesses,€to€review€any€adverseÐ  m Ðdocumentary€evidence€presented,€and€to€have€the€case€against€him/her€proved€by€aÐ  X Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€presented.Ðó C Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àWhether€an€inmate€entering€a€plea€of€guilty€was€advised€that€the€decision€of€theÐ É  Ðboard/hearing€officer€shall€not€be€appealable,€including€any€punishment€imposed€byÐ ´  Ðthe€board/hearing€officer.€€The€inmate€shall€sign€in€the€appropriate€space€on€CR„1834Ð Ÿï  Ðhis/her€understanding€and€acceptance€of€this€no€appeal€provision.€€ÐŠÚ Ð Ð  ÐÌTDOC€Policy€#€502.01(VI)(E)(2)(a)(5).Ð `° ÐÌà  àIn€addition,€if€an€inmate€pleads€guilty,€the€uniform€procedures€allow€the€inmate€or€his€advisorÐ 6† Ðto€make€a€statement€to€the€board€or€hearing€officer€prior€to€the€imposition€of€any€punishment.€Ð !q ÐTDOC€Policy€#€502.01(VI)(E)(2)(b).€€They€also€provide€that€an€appeal€is€available€only€as€toÐ  \ Ðoffenses€to€which€the€inmate€pled€not€guilty.€€TDOC€Policy€#€502.01(VI)(F).Ð ÷G ÐÌà  àWe€find€no€basis€for€setting€aside€the€guilty€plea.€€Mr.€Tankesly€does€not€allege€he€wasÐ Í Ðunaware€of€the€policies€quoted€above,€the€consequences€of€a€guilty€plea,€or€the€notices€appearingÐ ¸ Ðabove€his€signature€on€the€hearing€summary€he€has€supplied.€€Although€he€now€alleges€he€wasÐ £ó Ðcoerced€into€pleading€guilty,€he€does€not€deny€he€engaged€in€a€fight€with€another€inmate.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Even€ifÐ ŽÞ ÐMr.€Tankesly€was€told€he€could€be€charged€with€a€more€serious€disciplinary€infraction€carrying€moreÐ yÉ Ðsignificant€sanctions,€we€find€no€violation€of€due€process.€€He€willingly€entered€the€guilty€plea€to€theÐ d´ Ðlesser€offense,€but€now€seems€to€argue€that€if€he€had€known€he€would€be€required€to€serve€thirteenÐ OŸ Ðdays€in€segregation€instead€of€ten€days,€he€would€not€have€made€such€a€plea.€€Contrary€to€thisÐ : Š Ðposition,€Mr.€Tankesly€signed€a€statement€agreeing€to€ð ðwhatever€punishment€is€imposed.ððÐ %!u ÐÌà  àAs€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€stated,€prisoners€facing€prison€discipline€are€notÐ û"K! Ðentitled€to€the€full€panoply€of€rights€available€to€a€person€charged€with€a€criminal€offense.€€WeÐ æ#6" Ðcannot€conclude€that€all€the€procedural€requirements€applicable€to€a€guilty€plea€to€a€criminal€offense,Ð Ñ$! # Ðnecessarily€depriving€the€accused€of€his€or€her€liberty,€apply€to€the€procedures€for€prison€disciplinaryÐ ¼% !$ Ðproceedings.€€The€hearing€summary€provided€herein,€signed€by€Mr.€Tankesly€and€by€Sgt.€Pugh,Ð §&÷!% Ðprovided€notice€that€no€particular€punishment€was€part€of€the€prisonerððs€inducement€to€plead€guilty.€Ð ° ÐThus,€we€find€no€violation€of€Mr.€Tankeslyððs€due€process€rights€with€regard€to€his€guilty€plea.Ð ›ë ÐÔ‡Xí0XXXí0ÔÌÔ#†Xí0XXXí0ÿ~#ÔÓ  ÓIV.€The€PunishmentÐ qÁ ÐÓBÓÌà  àIt€is€clear€that€Mr.€Tankeslyððs€complaint€is€really€about€the€sanctions€imposed€against€him.Ð G — ÐWe€note€he€does€not€allege€the€sanctions€were€beyond€those€authorized€for€the€offense€of€fighting.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р2 ‚ ÐThe€essence€of€his€complaint€is€that€the€three€days€he€spent€in€administrative€segregation€prior€to€theÐ  m Ðhearing€were€not€credited€toward€the€ten€days€punitive€segregation€he€received€as€punishment€for€hisÐ  X Ðoffense.׃`×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€administrative€segregation,€which€was€authorized€pending€an€investigation€andÐ ó C  Ðhearing,€is€not€punishment€for€a€disciplinary€violation€and€serves€a€different€purpose.׃¯×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Þ .  ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankeslyððs€argument€is€that€he€was€denied€the€constitutional€right€to€equal€protectionÐ ´  Ðunder€the€€Tennessee€and€United€States€Constitutions€when€he€was€forced€to€serve,€in€effect,€thirteenÐ Ÿï  Ð(13)€days€on€a€ten€(10)€day€sentence€and€charged€with€paying€medical€costs€for€fighting.€€He€assertsÐ ŠÚ  Ðthat€his€equal€protection€rights€were€violated€when€credit€for€time€served€in€administrativeÐ uÅ  Ðsegregation€prior€to€hearing€when€eight€other€inmates€were€given€credit€for€time€served,׃'Á ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€fiveÐ `° Ðof€those€inmates€were€not€charged€with€paying€medical€costs€after€being€convicted€of€fighting.Ð K› ÐÌà  àThe€Supreme€Court€of€Tennessee€has€stated€that€the€Tennessee€Constitutionððs€equalÐ !q Ðprotection€provisions€confer€ð ðessentially€the€same€protectionðð€as€the€equal€protection€clause€of€theÐ  \ ÐUnited€States€Constitution.€€òòTennessee€Small€Sch.€Sys.€v.€McWherteróó,€851€S.W.2d€139,€152€(Tenn.Ð ÷G Ð1993).€€Equal€protection€requires€that€persons€similarly€situated€be€treated€the€same€under€the€law,Ð â2 Ðor€that€the€state€treat€persons€under€like€circumstances€and€conditions€the€same.€€òòGenesco,€Inc.€v.Ð Í ÐWoodsóó,€578€S.W.2d€639,€641€(Tenn.€1979),€òòsuperseded€on€other€grounds€by€Combustion€Engððg,€Inc.Ð ¸ Ðv.€Jacksonóó,€705€S.W.2d€655€(Tenn.€1986);€òòJaami€v.€Conleyóó,€958€S.W.2d€123,€126€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð £ó Ð1997).€€Nevertheless,€€ð ð[t]he€Fourteenth€Amendment€guarantees€equal€laws,€not€equal€results.ðð€Ð ŽÞ ÐòòPersonnel€Admððr€of€Mass.€v.€Feeneyóó,€442€U.S.€256,€273,€99€S.€Ct.€2282,€2293€(1979),€òòaffððdóó,€òòFeeneyÐ yÉ Ðv.€Personnel€Admððr€of€Massóó.,€445€U.S.€901,€100€S.€Ct.€1075€(1980).Ð d´ Їà  àEqual€protection€challenges€are€based€upon€governmental€classifications.€€The€classicÐ ° Ðanalysis€for€such€challenges€involves€the€application€of€differing€standards€depending€upon€theÐ ›ë Ðeffect.€€That€analysis€requires€strict€scrutiny€only€when€the€classification€interferes€with€a€Ð †Ö Ðfundamental€right€or€operates€to€the€peculiar€disadvantage€of€a€suspect€class.€€òòState€v.€Testeróó,€879Ð qÁ ÐS.W.2d€823,€828€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€standard€of€reduced€scrutiny€applies€in€other€situations,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð \¬ Ðrequiring€only€that€a€rational€basis€exist€for€the€classification,€or€that€the€classification€have€aÐ G — Ðreasonable€relationship€to€a€legitimate€state€interest.€€òòIdóó.Ð 2 ‚ ÐÌà  àUnless€a€suspect€classification€or€denial€of€a€fundamental€right€to€a€particular€class€isÐ  X Ðinvolved,€equal€protection€attacks€on€prison€regulations€are€analyzed€to€determine€whetherÐ ó C  Ðdistinctions€between€groups€have€a€rational€basis,€or,€more€particularly,€whether€they€are€reasonablyÐ Þ .  Ðrelated€to€penological€interests.€€òòLee€v.€Youngóó,€2000€U.S.€App.€LEXIS€28068,€at€*6€(6th€Cir.€Nov.Ð É  Ð6,€2000)€(citing€òòWilliams€v.€Laneóó,€851€F.2d€867,€877€(7th€Cir.€1988));€òòRawls€v.€Sundquistóó,€929€F.Ð ´  ÐSupp.€284,€289€(M.D.€Tenn.€1996),€òòaffððdóó,€òòRawls€v.€Sundquistóó,€1997€U.S.€App.€LEXIS€9606€(6th€Cir.Ð Ÿï  ÐApr.€28,€1997).׃*×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ŠÚ  ÐÌà  àMr.€Tankesly€does€not€attack€any€statute€or€regulation€as€an€unconstitutional€classification.€Ð `° ÐHis€claim€is€based€upon€an€allegation€of€unequal€exercise€of€the€discretion€granted€prison€officialsÐ K› Ðby€statute€and€disciplinary€policies.€€The€legislature€has€vested€the€management€and€government€ofÐ 6† Ðthe€state€penitentiaries€in€the€Department€of€Correction,€giving€ð ðall€the€power€necessary€for€the€fullÐ !q Ðand€efficient€exercise€of€the€executive,€administrative,€and€fiscal€supervision€over€correctionalÐ  \ Ðinstitutions€.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„6„102.€€This€broad€grant€of€legislative€discretion€necessarilyÐ ÷G Ðincludes€the€power€to€establish€policies€and€procedures€for€handling€disciplinary€matters.€€òòMandelaÐ â2 Ðv.€Campbellóó,€978€S.W.2d€531,€534€(Tenn.€1998).€€Department€policies€define€and€classify€theÐ Í Ðdisciplinary€offenses€for€which€prisoners€may€be€punished,€prescribe€the€types€and€extent€ofÐ ¸ Ðpunishment€for€each€class€of€offense,€and€describe€the€disciplinary€procedures€to€be€followed.Ð £ó ÐÌà  àAbsent€an€allegation€of€interference€with€a€fundamental€right€or€discriminatory€treatmentÐ yÉ Ðbased€on€suspect€classification,€a€plaintiff€cannot€maintain€an€equal€protection€claim€because€he€orÐ d´ Ðshe€was€treated€differently€from€others€alleged€to€be€similarly€situated.€€òòBooher€v.€U.S.€Postal€Serv.óó,Ð OŸ Ð843€F.2d€943,€944€(6th€Cir.€1988).€€In€òòBooher,óó€a€discharged€probationary€employee€alleged€he€wasÐ : Š Ðð ðsingled€outðð€for€discharge€and€other€probationary€employees€with€worse€attendance€records€wereÐ %!u Ðnot€similarly€discharged.€€òòId.€€óóThe€Sixth€Circuit€held€that€as€a€probationary€employee€the€plaintiffÐ "`  Ðhad€no€property€interest€in€continued€employment.€€The€court€further€held:Ð û"K! ÐÌà8  àBooher€seeks€to€make€out€a€violation€of€equal€protection€by€claiming€he€was€treatedÐ Ñ$! # Ðdifferently€from€other€similarly€situated€employees.€€Fatal€to€this€allegation€is€the€Ô_ÔfactÐ ¼% !$ Ðthat€there€is€no€claim€that€Ô_ÔBooherÔ_Ô€was€victimized€because€of€some€suspectÐ ° Ðclassification,€which€is€an€essential€element€of€an€equal€protection€claim.€€EvenÐ ›ë Ðassuming€there€was€an€unjustified€action€taken€against€Ô_ÔBooherÔ_Ô€this€single€action,Ð †Ö Ðwithout€more,€cannot€form€the€basis€of€an€equal€protection€claim.ÐqÁÐ Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€€The€court€reiterated€that€the€equal€protection€concept€does€not€create€a€classification€of€personsÐ G — Ðwho€received€better€treatment.€€òòIdóó.€€In€other€words,€an€equal€protection€claim€does€not€arise€simplyÐ 2 ‚ Ðbecause€of€differing€treatment.Ð  m ÐÌà  àThis€reasoning€has€been€applied€in€the€context€of€a€prisoner€challenging€his€reclassificationÐ ó C  Ðand€transfer€by€prison€officials.€€òòÔ_ÔNewellÔ_Ô€v.€Brownóó,€981€F.2d€880€(6th€Cir.€1992),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€510Ð Þ .  ÐU.S.€842,€114€S.€Ct.€127€(1993).€€After€first€determining€that€the€prisoner€did€not€have€aÐ É  Ðconstitutionally€protected€liberty€interest,€the€court€held€that€ð ðthe€plaintiff€could€not€make€out€aÐ ´  Ðviolation€of€his€equal€protection€rights€simply€by€showing€that€other€inmates€were€treatedÐ Ÿï  Ðdifferently.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Relying€upon€òòÔ_ÔBooherÔ_Ôóó,€the€court€held€that€the€prisoner€would€have€to€show€he€wasÐ ŠÚ  Ðreclassified€because€of€some€suspect€classification.€€òòIdóó.;òò€see€also€El„Amin€v.€Ô_ÔTireyÔ_Ôóó,€817€F.€Supp.€694,Ð uÅ  Ð700€(W.D.€Tenn.€1993),€òòÔ_ÔaffððdÔ_Ôóó,€1994€U.S.€App.€LEXIS€22118€(6th€Cir.€Aug.€16,€1994)€(stating€thatÐ `° Ða€prisonerððs€allegation€that€his€charge€and€conviction€of€disciplinary€offense€violated€his€right€toÐ K› Ðequal€protection€was€without€merit€because€it€was€based€merely€on€a€claim€that€other€inmates€wereÐ 6† Ðtreated€differently€and€did€not€allege€that€he€was€singled€out€because€of€his€membership€in€someÐ !q Ðgroup€or€because€of€some€ð ðimmutable€characteristicðð).€€Similarly,€a€prisoner€alleging€selectiveÐ  \ Ðenforcement€of€a€prison€regulation€cannot€sustain€an€equal€protection€claim€absent€an€assertion€andÐ ÷G Ða€showing€of€some€purposeful€discrimination.€€òòFletcher€v.€Ô_ÔChartrandÔ_Ôóó,€869€F.2d€1490€(6th€Cir.€1989)Ð â2 Ð(citing€òòÔ_ÔMcCleskeyÔ_Ô€v.€Kempóó,€481€U.S.€279,€109€S.€Ct.€1756€(1987)).€€One€isolated€incident€of€unevenÐ Í Ðenforcement€does€not€establish€purposeful€discrimination.€€òòFletcheróó,€869€F.2d€at€1490.Ð ¸ ÐÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔTankeslyÔ_Ô€has€not€alleged€he€was€treated€more€harshly€than€others€because€he€was€aÐ ŽÞ Ðmember€of€a€suspect€class.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Board€acted€within€its€discretion€in€the€sanctions€imposed€and€inÐ yÉ Ðits€refusal€to€credit€time€spent€in€administrative€segregation€and€stated€its€reason€for€the€sanction€asÐ d´ Ðthe€seriousness€of€the€incident.€€Mr.€Kiel€required€medical€attention.€€Obviously,€exercise€ofÐ OŸ Ðdiscretion€in€punishment€in€relation€to€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€is€reasonably€related€toÐ : Š ÐÔ_ÔpenologicalÔ_Ô€interests.€€Consequently,€Mr.€Ô_ÔTankeslyÔ_Ô€has€failed€to€state€a€claim€for€denial€of€equalÐ %!u Ðprotection.€€We€also€find€the€Board€did€not€act€arbitrarily€or€capriciously€or€beyond€its€jurisdiction.Ð "`  ÐÌÐ  æ#6" ÐÔ_Ôà  àTherefore,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€reliefÐ ° Ðcan€be€granted.€Ô‡Xí0XXXí0Ô€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€petitioner,€Mr.€Tankesly,€for€which€executionÐ ›ë Ðmay€issue€if€necessary.€Ð †Ö ÐÔ#†Xí0XXXí0 «#ÔÔ‡Xí0XXXí0ÔÌÔ#†Xí0XXXí0ã«#ÔÔ‡Xí0XXXí0ÔÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_____________________________________Ð 2 ‚ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÔ#†Xí0XXXí0&¬#ÔÐ  m Ð