Bobby R. Curry, Petitioner-appellant, v. United States Disciplinary Barracks, Commandant, Respondent-appellee, 162 F.3d 1172 (10th Cir. 1998)

BALDOCK, EBEL, and MURPHY, JJ.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT^* 

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel has unanimously determined that oral argument would not be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Petitioner Bobby R. Curry, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. In his petition, Curry challenged the constitutionality of a prison disciplinary action against him on the charge of indecent exposure to a female staff member. Curry alleges the disciplinary action is invalid because the evidence fails to demonstrate his exposure was intentional and claims he was denied due process because he was not allowed to cross-examine a witness during the disciplinary proceeding. The district court denied the petition finding as follows: (1) the disciplinary hearing complied with the procedural protections set out in Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 94 S. Ct. 2963, 41 L. Ed. 2d 935 (1974); (2) the finding of intentional indecent exposure was supported by "some evidence" in the record as required by Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 105 S. Ct. 2768, 86 L. Ed. 2d 356 (1985); and (3) that Curry was afforded all the process he was due during the disciplinary hearing.

This court has conducted a close review of Curry's brief and contentions, the district court order, and the entire record on appeal. That close review reveals no reversible error. Accordingly, this court AFFIRMS¹  for substantially those reasons stated by the district court in its Order dated April 23, 1998.