United States District Court, D. Connecticut
RULING ON MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND
A. BOLDEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
January 3, 2017, William Petaway (“Plaintiff”),
pro se, filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §
1983, alleging that the State of Connecticut and its prison
officials (“Defendants”) wrongfully deprived him
of sentence-reducing credits and confined him for sixty days
in violation of his constitutional rights. Compl., ECF No. 1,
April 18, 2019, the Court convened a hearing on all pending
motions, including Defendants' motion for summary
judgment. Minute Entry, ECF No. 126.
April 26, 2019, the Court granted Defendants' motion for
summary judgment. Ruling and Order on Mot. for Summ. J.
(“Ruling and Order”), ECF No. 127 On May 1, 2019,
Mr. Petaway moved for reconsideration. Mot. to Reconsider,
ECF No. 130. Mr. Petaway filed three additional motions
for or in support of reconsideration, ECF No. 129, 131, and
133. Mr. Petaway also moved for free copies of the relevant
hearing transcript. Mot. for Copy of the 4/18/19 Hearing
Minutes-Tr., ECF No. 132.
reasons below, the Court DENIES the motions
to reconsider, ECF No. 129-131 and 133, and
DENIES Mr. Petaway's motion for a free
transcript of the April 18, 2019 hearing, ECF No. 132.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
August 19, 2005, Mr. Petaway received a prison term of 150
months. State v. Petaway, NNH -CR04-0028093-T (J.
Gold) (Aug. 19, 2005). He received credit for jail time
served, resulting in a sentence scheduled to run until August
of 2017. Id.
years into his sentence, Mr. Petaway was allegedly
transferred to the Rhode Island Department of Corrections.
Compl. at 6. While incarcerated in Rhode Island, Mr. Petaway
allegedly received several disciplinary infractions, known as
“bookings.” Compl. at 6-7. Allegedly, Rhode
Island correctional officials did not give Mr. Petaway
written copies of his bookings or the evidence relied upon by
prison officials, or officials' reasons for finding Mr.
Petaway in violation of their rules. Compl. at 7.
Island correctional officials allegedly transmitted
information about Mr. Petaway's bookings to correctional
officials in Connecticut. Compl. at 8. Based upon those
reports, Connecticut officials allegedly reduced Mr.
Petaway's “good time” credits. Compl. 8-9.
Mr. Petaway alleges that had his “‘good time'
not been taken, or had it been returned, [he] would [have]
been released in May 2016[.]” Compl. at 9.
Petaway obtained his release from prison in July 2016.
Compl., at 9.
January 3, 2017, Mr. Petaway sued prison officials under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. Compl. at 9-10. On February 3, 2017, the
Court granted Mr. Petaway leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. Order ...