In October 1976 Ronald Reed escaped from the Lincoln Work Release Center and was subsequently convicted of and sentenced for the crime of escape. His escape also served as the basis for a prison disciplinary proceeding before the Nebraska Penal Complex Adjustment Committee in February 1978. As a result of that hearing, Reed lost all his accumulated good time and was placed in the Nebraska Penal Complex Adjustment Center for six months. The disciplinary committee action was affirmed by the Nebraska Penal Complex Appeal Board. Reed then sued in district court for reversal of the disciplinary committee decision. The district court dismissed Reed's petition, rejecting his argument that district court jurisdiction was provided by the judicial review sections of the Nebraska Administrative Procedure Act (APA). In Reed v. Parratt, the Nebraska Supreme Court, over a dissent by Chief Justice Krivosha, rejected Reed's claim that the APA provides for judicial review of a prison disciplinary decision. In this article, I examine the Reed decision, a decision that I believe demonstrates flawed legislative interpretation influenced by ill-advised policy considerations. I also present alternatives to rectify the Reed result and thereby provide judicial review of prison disciplinary decisions.
Josephine R. Potuto,
Prison Disciplinary Procedures and Judicial Review under the Nebraska Administrative Procedure Act,
61 Neb. L. Rev.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol61/iss1/2