Glenn Hill VS Louisiana Department of Corrections
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION E STAT OF iJISIANA CQURT C3F APP AE FRST IR U N0 2013 a440 GLENN HILL VERSUS LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS udgment rendered NOV O 1 2013 Appealed from the A 19 Judicial District Court in and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge Louisiana Trial Court No 611 483 Honorable Wilson Fields Judge n GLENN HILL APPELLANT PLAINTIFF ANGIE LA IN PROPER PERSON DEBRA A RUTLEDGE ATTORNEY FOR BATON ROUGE LA APPELLEE DEFENDANT LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS BEFORE PETTIGREW McDONALD AND McCLENDON JJ PETTIGREW J Glenn Hill Hill an inmate in the custody of the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections the Department appeals a district court judgment dated January 8 2013 which adopted the Commissioner sreport that recommended that the s Department decision to maintain the charges and sentence imposed on the inmate be afFirmed finding sufficient evidence that the inmate violated prison rule number 21E Aggravated Sex OfFense that he was provided due process and that the decision was not arbitrary or manifestly erroneous After a thorough review of the record and the arguments presented by Hill we find no error below and affirm On November 10 2011 OfFicer Ashley Whaley Ofc Whaley observed Hill seated on a toilet and acting in a suspicious manner Upon further observation Ofc Whaley saw that Hill was masturbating in violation of a rule prohibiting such behavior in the view of staff or non persons Ofc Whaley verbally ordered Hill to discontinue his incarcerated actions and go to the door with which Hill complied Following the incident Hill was charged with a violation of prison rule 21E Aggravated Sex Offense Hill was provided a hearing before the disciplinary board the Board where he was accompanied by inmate counsel during which evidence was presented consisting of the officer eyewitness s testimony and written documentation of the incident as well as the video recording from cameras located in the area of the offense During the hearing Hill denied that the incident occurred Following the hearing the Board found him guilty as charged and imposed a penalty of administrative segregation being moved to the working cell block and the loss of thirty days of good time The Board noted that due to the angle of the video recording Hill could not actually be seen with his penis in his hand however the Board nonetheless concluded that Ofc Whaley eyewitness account together with the s s video depiction of Hill arm and shoulder movements provided sufFicient evidence to s find Hill guilty as charged The Department Secretary James LeBlanc agreed with the Board rendering its decision final Hill then filed a petition for judicial review of the final agency decision in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court 19 JDC it was assigned to a commissioner for 2 evaluation and to make a recommendation to the district court judge The commissioner reviewed the record and agreed with the Secretary sdecision finding it was supported by ample evidence and recommended that it be affirmed The trial court then adopted the s Commissioner report and affirmed the Department final decision finding that it was s not arbitrary or manifestly erroneous or in violation of Hill rights and dismissing the s request for judicial review with prejudice This appeal by Hill followed On appeal Hill complains that he was denied his due process rights and that the evidence was insufficient to find him guilty of the offense because the video recording which the Board had noted did not actually shaw the exact location of his hands was no longer available and was not included in the evidence presented In response to Hill s earlier request that the video be provided he was notified in writing that the video was no longer available having been purged according to Department rules We find Hill s argument lacks merit At the hearing before the Board the evidence consisted of the testimony of Ofc Whaley eyewitness observations the video that recorded the incident and Hill s s denial that the incident took place On appeal to the Department Secretary and to the Commissioner the evidence was the same except the video was not available The Commissioner was aware that the Board decision was based on the testimony as well as s the video The Commissioner made a credibility determination based on the evidence presented and obviously believed Ofc Whaley account and rejected Hill denial The s s Commissioner also found that the DepartmenYs decision was neither arbitrary nor manifestly erroneous Those findings are owed great deference and cannot be overturned in the absence of manifest error The trial court adopted the Commissioner report and we find no manifest error in s the trial court judgment s 1 The o of commissioner of the 19th JDC was created by La R 13 to hear and recommend ce S 711 disposition of criminal and civil proceedings arising out of the incarceration of state prisoners The s commissioner written findings and recommendations are submitted to a district court judge who may accept reject or modify them La R 13 S 713 S C 3 Accordingly we find no error in the trial court adoption of the Commissioner s s recommendation affirming the Department decision a the Board finding Hill s rming s guilty as charged and that the penalty imposed therefor was proper We issue this memorandum decision in accordance with Uniform Rules of Appeal Rule 2 s Court 1B 16 AFFIRMED 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
