Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gracia v. Maine Department of Corrections

Superior Court of Maine, Kennebec

December 20, 2017

FELIX GRACIA, Petitioner
v.
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.

          DECISION AND ORDER

          William R. Stokes, Justice, Maine Superior Court

          INTRODUCTION

         The matter before the Court is an appeal by Felix Gracia, an inmate at the Maine State Prison, from a disciplinary proceeding that resulted in the imposition of sanctions against him for the offense of "trafficking, " a Class A violation. This appeal has been brought in accordance with 5 M.R.S. §§11001-11008 (Administrative Procedure Act) and M.R. Civ. P. 8OC.

         FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         As set out in the Disciplinary Hearing Report dated March 21, 2017, and authored by Lt. Lidia Burnham, the facts are as follows:[1]

          On January 12, Petitioner gave his sister, Carmen, a phone number for "Ramon's nephew" and told her to give him $600 and that "they are 50."

         Between January 12 and January 16, fellow inmate Jose Ramon Quinones called his nephew to tell him that a woman from Connecticut, who Lt. Burnham parenthetically states is Carmen, was going to give him $600 and that her brother, parenthetically noted as Petitioner, was going to buy "50 chickens for $600." Lt. Burnham interprets "50 chickens for $600" to mean 50 strips of Suboxone for $600.

         On January 16, Petitioner spoke with Carmen and told her to call the "guy" and tell him to remove the tinfoil. According to Lt. Burhnam's report, Suboxone comes in individual packages with tinfoil on the inside. Also on January 16, Petitioner told Carmen that someone was going to call and meet her at her house.

         Petitioner spoke with Carmen on January 26 and she told him that the package arrived. The same day, Petitioner called Jose Santiago and told him that he needed to call because "it" was there and waiting for him to pick "it" up. On January 29, Petitioner called Santiago again who said that he had made arrangements to "pick that up" on Wednesday.

         On January 30, Petitioner called Carmen and told her that "El titere, " who Lt. Burnham parenthetically claimed was Santiago, would call her later and meet her on Wednesday. Petitioner also asked Carmen to open the packages and count "them." She said she only received 45, and Petitioner was upset because he paid $600 for 50.

          On February 2, Petitioner called Carmen who said that the "guy, " noted parenthetically as Santiago, showed up at her house and she gave him 50.

         Between February 11 and February 20, Petitioner attempted several phone calls to Santiago, who did not answer, so he asked Carmen to contact him and get the "stuff back. On February 20. Petitioner told Carmen that he spoke with the "guy, " parenthetically identified as Santiago. On February 28, Petitioner told Carmen that he hoped that over the weekend he was going to get the "stuff in." Between February 28 and March 21, no Suboxone arrived at the prison.

         On March 22, Lt. Burnham's report was approved and forwarded for investigation, and an investigation was opened. (C.R. 4). Petitioner was read the report and charged with a trafficking violation. (C.R. 3, 4). Petitioner did not make a statement in regards to the opening of the investigation. (C.R. 4). On March 27, Petitioner received notice of the hearing scheduled for March 30 and indicated that he did not wish to call witnesses at the hearing. (C.R. 1).

         Petitioner requested access to all staff, video, phone, and forensic evidence. (C.R. 6). He also requested, in a written and undated document, to examine Lt. Burnham, although he did not otherwise request to present any witnesses. (C.R. 1, 6, 8). Respondent contends that no video or forensic records, or additional staff reports exist. (Resp.'s Br. 9, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.