WPC< 0Nr,&N#n)5]b;ڤlhhQM5m(%6/;Z|Q6~Z :2-I^M)Cvd DV 7@ɋ8pLuƓOZdo2%:JmV{ΣyBK8m{*SFd#!xUN % 0:^ ' w3 47 K Z m\ bs { 0 0DV i  U: N B 0V D5VVVVV AQ 0V 0DHP LaserJet 8000 DN PS0(\Z  Z6Times New Roman Regular($USUS.,M='L {Z='|N3|xU- -   (u(2($ !USUS.,  XRX     0  (#$  0   _ b"USUS.,  )  _  Ad FILEDXY7X)  September29,1999Cecil_Crowson_,Jr.AppellateCourt_ClerkdA _   ($USUS.,XRX     1    _ThisopinionfollowsthecitationstotherulesoftheDepartmentofCorrectionasfound  intheappelleesbrief.Weunderstandtheorganizationoftheseruleshasbeenmodifiedsincetheproceedingscomplainedof.,OAZ"Arial Regular d(.3$ !USUS.,  YYYY)!dxdxabZc[C<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(.3$ !USUS.,  ($$   1  !USUS.,  _TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T   8+'dd8      [_v`[@0,j:`  `@E` 8ttxP,  v__@  3 ! INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @(ATNASHVILLE #+' ! 3#Ԉ < HOWARDTURNER,0  08T$T$08T$8T$)p T$T$   0      8   ) Petitioner/Appellant,0 8 08T$8T$) T$T$   0      8   )  0      8   )0  AppealNo. T$T$ VS.0 00 T$ T$00 T$0 T$0T$T$08T$T$08T$8T$)0T$T$01A019903CH00139 T$T$   0      8   )  0      8   )0  WayneChancery> T$T$ SHIRLEYCAMPBELL,0 8 08T$8T$)0T$T$No.10201PT$T$   0      8   ) Respondent/Appellee.0 8 08T$8T$)$tT$T$ @iiAPPEALEDFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTOFWAYNECOUNTY@66"ATWAYNESBORO,TENNESSEE@ THEHONORABLESTELLAHARGROVE,JUDGEHOWARDTURNER,#239571SouthCentralCorrectionalFacilityP.O.Box279Clifton,Tennessee384250279 ProSe/Petitioner/AppellantTOMANDERSON130CStonebridgeBoulevardJackson,Tennessee38305 AttorneyforRespondent/Appellee@$AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED  0      8     BENH.CANTRELL,  0      8     PRESIDINGJUDGE,M.S.CONCUR:KOCH,J.CAIN,J.@( 3 !+' OPINION #+' ! 3 #Ԉ ;63 Ї  0 Theissueinthiscaseiswhetherapetitionforcertioraristatesacauseofactionwhenitseeksareviewofthepunishmentimposedforviolatingprisonrulesandnamesonlytheemployeeoftheprivatecompanyrunningtheprison.Weholdthatitdoesnot,andweaffirmtheorderofthelowercourt.@- I.  d    0 HowardTurner,aprisonerattheSouthCentralCorrectionalFacility(SCCF),wascitedforparticipationin SecurityThreatGroupActivity.Afterahearing,theSCCFDisciplinaryBoardrecommendedthatMr.Turnerbesentencedtotendayspunitivesegregation,suspendedforsixtydays,a$5.00fine,andsixmonthspackagerestriction.Mr.TurnerappealedthesentencethroughthestagesprovidedbytheDepartmentofCorrection,wherethesentencewasfinallyaffirmedbytheCommissioner.  0 Mr.TurnerfiledthispetitionforcertiorariandnamedastheonlyrespondentShirleyCampbell,anemployeeofCorrectionsCorporationofAmerica,theprivateoperatoroftheprison.ThepetitionallegedthatMs.CampbellwasthechairoftheDisciplinaryBoardthatimposedpunishmentonMr.Turner;thattheBoarddeniedhimacontinuance;thattheproceedingwasnotobservedbytheCommissionersdesigneeasrequiredbystatuteforaClassAinfraction;thattheBoardreliedonaconfidentialinformant;andthattheBoardfailedtofollowvariousproceduralrules.  5@1.   0 ThepetitionsoughtareviewoftheBoardsdecisionandaholding thatthedecisionwasunreasonable,arbitrary,capricious,andnotlegallysufficient.Ms.CampbellfiledamotiontodismisspursuanttoRule12.02(6),Tenn.R.Civ.Proc.TheWayneCountyChanceryCourtgrantedthemotion.0  @qq- T$ T$ II.  d    0 Inaprivatelyoperatedstateprison,theemployeesoftheprivatecompanyareprohibitedfrom Granting,denying,orrevokingsentencecredits;placinganinmateunderlessrestrictivecustody;ortakinganydisciplinaryaction.Tenn.CodeAnn.Section4124110(5).Thus,theCommissionerofCorrectionshasformulatedapolicytogoverntheimpositionofpunishmentforviolatingprisonrulesinaprivatelyoperatedprison.AtSCCF,apanelofthreestaffmembershearsthechargeandrecommendspunishmenttotheCommissionersdesignee,aTDOCemployeeauthorizedbytheCommissionertoserveastheapprovingauthorityfordisciplinarypunishments.TDOCPolicy#9502.01(IV)(C).Ifthechargeisseriousenough(aClassAorBinfraction)theCommissionersdesigneemustpersonallyobservetheproceedingandapproveormodifytherecommendationsofthedisciplinaryboard.TDOCPolicy#9502.01(VI)(D)(2). #  1       `-(&   0 TheimpositionofpunishmentisreviewedbytheRegionalAdministrator,TDOCPolicy#9502.01(VI)(E)(1)(b),andtheprisonerhasaright 3/,  [      toappealtotheCommissionerofCorrections.TDOCPolicy#9502.01(VI)(E)(2)(a).ThecomplaintinthiscaseallegesthatMr.TurnerfollowedtheproceduresetforthintheTDOCpolicyandthathispunishmentwasultimatelyaffirmedbytheCommissioner.  0 InMandelav.Campbell,978S.W.2d531(Tenn.1998),our d  SupremeCourtreviewedtheproceduresintheTDOCpolicyandheldthattheproceduressatisfiedtherequirementsofTenn.CodeAnn.Section4124110(5).Thecourtbaseditsdecisiononthefactthatthedisciplinary boardsrecommendationastopunishmentwasmerelyarecommendation,andactualdisciplinewasnotimposeduntiltheTDOCrepresentativereviewedthecaseandapprovedtheboardsrecommendation.978S.W.2dat533.Wethinkitnecessarilyfollowsthatapetitionforcertioraridirectedtothechairofthedisciplinaryboard,anemployeeofaprivatecorporationhavingnopowertoimposepunishmentuponthepetitioner,failstostateacauseofactionagainsttherespondent.Thewritshouldbedirectedtothegovernmentalagencythatisresponsiblefortheactionsofwhichthepetitionercomplains.IftheCommissionersdesigneedidnotobservetheproceedings,asrequiredbytheTDOCpolicy,thatreasonforreliefshouldbeassertedagainstthegovernment.  0 ThejudgmentofthecourtbelowisaffirmedandthecauseisremandedtotheChanceryCourtofWayneCountyforanyfurtherproceedingsnecessary.Taxthecostsonappealtotheappellant.  0      8   __________________________________  0      8   BENH.CANTRELL,  0      8   PRESIDINGJUDGE,M.S. 4:52 CONCUR:________________________________WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE________________________________WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE    X