DHO holds Conflicting Roles

Identifying the Conflict:

What is the name of the party you are disputing?

Describe the specific roles this party has played in your disciplinary process (e.g., DHO, Case Manager).

How do you believe these roles have conflicted?

Legal Grounds:

Are you aware of specific regulations or laws that this involvement violates? Please specify

Can you cite relevant sections of the Code of Federal Regulations (e.g., 28 C.F.R. §§ 541.3, 541.8, 541.13, 541.19) or other legal statutes that support your argument?

Evidence of Bias:

Do you have any evidence or examples of past behavior that demonstrates this party's bias?

Are there any witnesses who can attest to the conflict of interest or biased behavior?

Specific Incident:

Provide details of the incident where double punishment was imposed.

How did the party act in both the DHO and Case Manager roles concerning this incident?

Impact on Due Process and Rehabilitation:

How do you believe this conflict of interest will affect your due process rights?

Can you provide any precedents where similar conflicts were addressed in a manner that supports your argument?

Remedial Actions:

What specific actions are you requesting?

Why do you believe these actions are necessary for ensuring a fair hearing?

Additional Information:

Is there any other relevant information or documentation that you think is important for your dispute?

Maximum file size: 8.39MB

Prompt

Using the information provided in the questionnaire, draft a formal argument addressing the inconsistency of the treatment described by the inmate with BOP policy and Federal law. The argument should include the following elements and of the Sample. 

 **Introduction:** 
   - Clearly state the inmate's full name, inmate number, facility name, date of the incident, and the specific sanction or treatment being contested.

2. **Summary of Allegations:**
   - Provide a detailed description of the allegations made against the inmate, including any items or property involved and any additional statements made by staff or officials.

3. **Condition and Issuance of Property:**
   - Describe the items issued to the inmate upon arrival, their condition, and any documentation or inspection related to their issuance.

4. **Defense and Witnesses:**
   - Outline the defense provided by the inmate, including witness testimony and any evidence that was ignored or disregarded.

5. **Violation of Policy and Law:**
   - Reference the specific BOP policies and Federal regulations violated in the case, explaining how the treatment was inconsistent with these standards.

6. **Sanction Details:**
   - Provide a summary of the sanctions imposed, including financial amounts and the justification (if any) provided by the staff.

7. **Conclusion:**
   - Conclude by summarizing the argument, requesting the overturning of the sanction, and the restoration of any penalties (e.g., Good Conduct Time, financial charges).

**Important:** Ensure that the final draft includes the correct names, numbers, and dates provided by the inmate. The argument should be clear, concise, and supported by references to relevant BOP policies and Federal regulations.
---
### Dispute of Conflicting Party Performing Disciplinary Hearing

**To Whom It May Concern:**

I am writing to formally dispute the involvement of **Ai input who is involved*** in my disciplinary process. This dispute is based on the following grounds:

1. **Conflict of Interest**:  **Ai input who is involved** dual roles as a DHO (Disciplinary Hearing Officer) and **Ai input their role*** in my case create a clear conflict of interest, violating BOP policies and principles of fairness.

2. **Violation of Federal Regulations**: According to 28 C.F.R. § 541.3 and 28 C.F.R. § 541.13, fairness and consistency must be maintained in disciplinary procedures. The participation of  **Ai input who is involved***  in both roles contradicts 28 C.F.R. § 541.19, which mandates impartiality and independence in disciplinary hearings. Additionally, 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 underscores that  **Ai input role of who is involved*** , due to their direct involvement with inmates' programmatic needs, cannot remain unbiased.

3. **Due Process Rights**: The dual punishment imposed by  **Ai input who is involved*** , where she acted as both DHO and Case Manager, violates my due process rights under the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees a fair and impartial hearing.

4. **Specific Incident**:  **Ai input who is involved***  acted as the DHO and sanctioned me. Subsequently, in her role as  **Ai input role of who is involved*** , she imposed an additional punishment by reducing my halfway house placement by three months. This constitutes double punishment for the same incident.

5. **Impact on Rehabilitation**: This double punishment not only contravenes the BOP's standards of fairness and consistency but also undermines the rehabilitative objectives of the correctional system.

In light of these points, I respectfully request the following:

- The immediate recusal of  **Ai input who is involved***  from my  **Ai input role who is involved***  and any further disciplinary actions.
- The appointment of an impartial officer to review my disciplinary case and ensure fairness.

I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and look forward to a fair and unbiased resolution.

Sincerely,  
[Your Full Name]  
[Your Register Number]  
[Your Facility]

Draft a comprehensive argument. 

Here's a sample of a comprehensive argument:

If you are human, leave this field blank.