Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 33.30.295 (2026)
Review of prisoner disciplinary decisions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 33.30.295. Review of prisoner disciplinary decisions.
(a) A prisoner may obtain judicial review by the superior court of a final disciplinary decision by the department only if the prisoner alleges specific facts establishing a violation of the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights that prejudiced the prisoner's right to a fair adjudication. An appeal shall be commenced by the prisoner filing a notice of appeal and other required documents in accordance with AS 09.19 and the applicable rules of court governing administrative appeals that do not conflict with AS 09.19. Unless the appeal is not accepted for filing under AS 09.19.010 or is dismissed under AS 09.19.020, a record of the proceedings shall be prepared by the department, consisting of the original papers and exhibits submitted in the disciplinary process and a cassette tape of the disciplinary hearing. The record shall be prepared and transmitted in accordance with the applicable rules of court governing administrative appeals.
(b) A disciplinary decision may not be reversed
(1) unless the court finds that the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights were violated in the course of the disciplinary process, and that the violation prejudiced the prisoner's right to a fair adjudication;
(2) because the department failed to follow hearing requirements set out in state statutes and regulations, unless the prisoner was prejudiced by the denial of a right guaranteed by the Alaska Constitution or United States Constitution; if such prejudice is found, the court shall enter judgment as provided in (c) of this section and remand the case to the department; or
(3) because of insufficient evidence if the record described in (a) of this section shows that the disciplinary decision was based on some evidence that could support the decision reached.
(c) The court shall enter judgment setting aside or affirming the disciplinary decision without limiting or controlling the discretion vested in the department to allocate resources within the department and to control security and administration within the prison system.
(a) A prisoner may obtain judicial review by the superior court of a final disciplinary decision by the department only if the prisoner alleges specific facts establishing a violation of the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights that prejudiced the prisoner's right to a fair adjudication. An appeal shall be commenced by the prisoner filing a notice of appeal and other required documents in accordance with AS 09.19 and the applicable rules of court governing administrative appeals that do not conflict with AS 09.19. Unless the appeal is not accepted for filing under AS 09.19.010 or is dismissed under AS 09.19.020, a record of the proceedings shall be prepared by the department, consisting of the original papers and exhibits submitted in the disciplinary process and a cassette tape of the disciplinary hearing. The record shall be prepared and transmitted in accordance with the applicable rules of court governing administrative appeals.
(b) A disciplinary decision may not be reversed
(1) unless the court finds that the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights were violated in the course of the disciplinary process, and that the violation prejudiced the prisoner's right to a fair adjudication;
(2) because the department failed to follow hearing requirements set out in state statutes and regulations, unless the prisoner was prejudiced by the denial of a right guaranteed by the Alaska Constitution or United States Constitution; if such prejudice is found, the court shall enter judgment as provided in (c) of this section and remand the case to the department; or
(3) because of insufficient evidence if the record described in (a) of this section shows that the disciplinary decision was based on some evidence that could support the decision reached.
(c) The court shall enter judgment setting aside or affirming the disciplinary decision without limiting or controlling the discretion vested in the department to allocate resources within the department and to control security and administration within the prison system.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: Walker v. State, Dept. of Corr., 421 P.3d 74 (Alaska 2018).
Walker v. State, Dept. of Corr., 421 P.3d 74 (Alaska 2018). “" 28 However, AS 33.30.295 already circumscribes courts' authority to review final disciplinary decisions: Prisoners may obtain judicial review of a final disciplinary decision only when they allege "violation of .”
David Nordlund v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr., 520 P.3d 1178 (Alaska 2022). “and that the violation 5 See AS 33.30.295(b) (“A disciplinary decision may not be reversed .”
James v. State, Dep't of Corr., 260 P.3d 1046 (Alaska 2011). “2d 539, 540 (Alaska 1988); see also AS 33.30.295(b)(1) (providing that a disciplinary decision "may not be reversed .”
Pease-Madore v. State, Dept. of Corr., 414 P.3d 671 (Alaska 2018). “AS 33.30.295(b) provides, "A disciplinary decision may not be reversed (1) unless the court finds that the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights were violated in the course of the disciplinary process, and that the violation prejudiced the prisoner's right to a fair…”
Huber v. State, Dept. of Corr., 426 P.3d 969 (Alaska 2018). “See AS 33.30.295(a) ("A prisoner may obtain judicial review by the superior court of a final disciplinary decision by the [DOC] only if the prisoner alleges specific facts establishing a violation of the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights that prejudiced the prisoner's…”
Barber v. State, Dep't of Corr., 314 P.3d 58 (Alaska 2013). “AS 33.30.295. 35 . Mathis, 942 P.2d at 1121 .”
Brandon v. State, Dep't of Corr., 73 P.3d 1230 (Alaska 2003). “400(b)." 7 . 22 AAC 05.610 (1991) provides: "Failure of a staff member to follow the regulations set out in this chapter does not invalidate a decision absent a showing of prejudice by the prisoner.”
Simmons v. State, Dept. of Corr., 426 P.3d 1011 (Alaska 2018). “However, the Department's violation of an inmate's constitutional right to counsel in itself is not sufficient to reverse the Department's disciplinary decision - to overturn a prison disciplinary decision AS 33.30.295(b)(1) requires the court to find that a violation of the…”
Hertz v. State, 22 P.3d 895 (Alaska Ct. App. 2001). “See AS 33.30.295. 43 . See Richardson v. McKnight, 521 U.”
DeRemer v. State, Dep't of Corr., 307 P.3d 975 (Alaska 2013). “"No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. The right of all persons to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations shall not be infringed.”
Johnson v. State, Dept. of Corr. (Alaska 2016). “STANDARDS OF REVIEW This case requires us to interpret AS 33.30.295. “The interpretation of a statute is a question of law to which we apply our independent judgment, interpreting the statute according to reason, practicality, and common sense, considering the meaning of the…”
Edward Parks v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. (Alaska 2018). “The prisoner appeals, arguing that the superior court abused its discretion in dismissing his appeal, that AS 33.30.295 is unconstitutional, and that DOC violated his due process rights.”
— Alaska Stat. § 33.30.295(a) — 12 cases
Walker v. State, Dept. of Corr., 421 P.3d 74 (Alaska 2018). “" 28 However, AS 33.30.295 already circumscribes courts' authority to review final disciplinary decisions: Prisoners may obtain judicial review of a final disciplinary decision only when they allege "violation of .”
Brandon v. State, Dep't of Corr., 73 P.3d 1230 (Alaska 2003). “400(b)." 7 . 22 AAC 05.610 (1991) provides: "Failure of a staff member to follow the regulations set out in this chapter does not invalidate a decision absent a showing of prejudice by the prisoner.”
Huber v. State, Dept. of Corr., 426 P.3d 969 (Alaska 2018). “See AS 33.30.295(a) ("A prisoner may obtain judicial review by the superior court of a final disciplinary decision by the [DOC] only if the prisoner alleges specific facts establishing a violation of the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights that prejudiced the prisoner's…”
Barber v. State, Dep't of Corr., 314 P.3d 58 (Alaska 2013). “AS 33.30.295. 35 . Mathis, 942 P.2d at 1121 .”
Johnson v. State, Dept. of Corr. (Alaska 2016). “STANDARDS OF REVIEW This case requires us to interpret AS 33.30.295. “The interpretation of a statute is a question of law to which we apply our independent judgment, interpreting the statute according to reason, practicality, and common sense, considering the meaning of the…”
— Alaska Stat. § 33.30.295(b) — 4 cases
Pease-Madore v. State, Dept. of Corr., 414 P.3d 671 (Alaska 2018). “AS 33.30.295(b) provides, "A disciplinary decision may not be reversed (1) unless the court finds that the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights were violated in the course of the disciplinary process, and that the violation prejudiced the prisoner's right to a fair…”
Huber v. State, Dept. of Corr., 426 P.3d 969 (Alaska 2018). “See AS 33.30.295(a) ("A prisoner may obtain judicial review by the superior court of a final disciplinary decision by the [DOC] only if the prisoner alleges specific facts establishing a violation of the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights that prejudiced the prisoner's…”
David Nordlund v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr., 520 P.3d 1178 (Alaska 2022). “and that the violation 5 See AS 33.30.295(b) (“A disciplinary decision may not be reversed .”
William Terry Smith v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. (Alaska 2012).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.30.295(b)(1) — 12 cases
James v. State, Dep't of Corr., 260 P.3d 1046 (Alaska 2011). “2d 539, 540 (Alaska 1988); see also AS 33.30.295(b)(1) (providing that a disciplinary decision "may not be reversed .”
Pease-Madore v. State, Dept. of Corr., 414 P.3d 671 (Alaska 2018). “AS 33.30.295(b) provides, "A disciplinary decision may not be reversed (1) unless the court finds that the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights were violated in the course of the disciplinary process, and that the violation prejudiced the prisoner's right to a fair…”
Simmons v. State, Dept. of Corr., 426 P.3d 1011 (Alaska 2018). “However, the Department's violation of an inmate's constitutional right to counsel in itself is not sufficient to reverse the Department's disciplinary decision - to overturn a prison disciplinary decision AS 33.30.295(b)(1) requires the court to find that a violation of the…”
Huber v. State, Dept. of Corr., 426 P.3d 969 (Alaska 2018). “See AS 33.30.295(a) ("A prisoner may obtain judicial review by the superior court of a final disciplinary decision by the [DOC] only if the prisoner alleges specific facts establishing a violation of the prisoner's fundamental constitutional rights that prejudiced the prisoner's…”
David Nordlund v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr., 520 P.3d 1178 (Alaska 2022). “and that the violation 5 See AS 33.30.295(b) (“A disciplinary decision may not be reversed .”
— Alaska Stat. § 33.30.295(b)(2) — 3 cases
Michael L. McLaughlin v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. (Alaska 2024).
Richard B. DeRemer III v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. (Alaska 2014).
William Terry Smith v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. (Alaska 2012).
— Alaska Stat. § 33.30.295(b)(3) — 4 cases
David Nordlund v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr., 520 P.3d 1178 (Alaska 2022). “and that the violation 5 See AS 33.30.295(b) (“A disciplinary decision may not be reversed .”
DeRemer v. State, Dep't of Corr., 307 P.3d 975 (Alaska 2013). “"No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. The right of all persons to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations shall not be infringed.”
Patrick H. Torrence v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. (Alaska 2026).
Mate Valoaga v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Corr. (Alaska 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.