28 C.F.R. § 541.8

Discipline Hearing Officer (DHO) hearing

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The Discipline Hearing Officer (DHO) will only conduct a hearing on the incident report if referred by the UDC. The DHO's hearing involves the following:

(a) Available dispositions. The DHO will make one of the following decisions after a hearing on the incident report:

(1) You committed the prohibited act(s) charged, and/or a similar prohibited act(s) as described in the incident report;

(2) You did not commit the prohibited act(s) charged; or

(3) The incident report will be referred back for further investigation, review, and disposition.

(b) Discipline Hearing Officer. The DHO will be an impartial decision maker who was not a victim, witness, investigator, or otherwise significantly involved in the incident.

(c) Timing. You will receive written notice of the charge(s) against you at least 24 hours before the DHO's hearing. You may waive this requirement, in which case the DHO's hearing can be conducted sooner.

(d) Staff Representative. You are entitled to have a staff representative during the DHO hearing process as follows:

(1) How to get a staff representative. You may request the staff representative of your choice, so long as that person was not a victim, witness, investigator, or otherwise significantly involved in the incident. If your request(s) cannot be fulfilled, and you still want a staff representative, the Warden will appoint one. The Warden will also appoint a staff representative if it appears you are unable to adequately represent yourself before the DHO, for example, if you are illiterate or have difficulty understanding the charges against you.

(2) How the staff representative will help you. Prior to the DHO's hearing, the staff representative will be available to help you understand the incident report charges and potential consequences. The staff representative may also assist you by speaking with and scheduling witnesses, obtaining written statements, and otherwise helping you prepare evidence for presentation at the DHO's hearing. During the DHO's hearing, you are entitled to have the staff representative appear and assist you in understanding the proceedings. The staff representative can also assist you in presenting evidence during the DHO's hearing.

(3) How the staff representative may appear. Your staff representative may appear either in person or electronically (for example, by video or telephone conferencing) at the DHO's discretion. If your staff representative is not available for the scheduled hearing, you may either select another staff representative, request the hearing be postponed for a reasonable amount of time until your staff representative can appear, or proceed without a staff representative.

(e) Inmate appearance. You are permitted to appear before the DHO during the hearing on the incident report as follows:

(1) You may appear either in person or electronically (for example, by video or telephone conferencing), at the DHO's discretion.

(2) Your appearance may be prohibited during DHO deliberations or when your presence would jeopardize institution security, at the DHO's discretion.

(3) You may waive your appearance before the DHO. If you waive your appearance, the DHO hearing will be conducted in your absence.

(4) If you escape or are otherwise absent from custody, the DHO will conduct a hearing in your absence at the institution where you were last confined.

(f) Evidence and witnesses. You are entitled to make a statement and present documentary evidence to the DHO on your own behalf. The DHO will consider all evidence presented during the hearing. The DHO's decision will be based on at least some facts and, if there is conflicting evidence, on the greater weight of the evidence. Witnesses may appear at the DHO's hearing as follows:

(1) Witnesses may appear before the DHO either in person or electronically (for example, by video or telephone conferencing) at the DHO's discretion.

(2) The DHO will call witnesses who have information directly relevant to the charge(s) and who are reasonably available. However, the DHO need not call witnesses adverse to you if their testimony is adequately summarized in the incident report or other investigation materials.

(3) You or your staff representative may request witnesses appear at the hearing to testify on your behalf. Your requested witnesses may not appear if, in the DHO's discretion, they are not reasonably available, their presence at the hearing would jeopardize institution security, or they would present repetitive evidence.

(4) If your requested witnesses are unavailable to appear, written statements can be requested by either the DHO or staff representative. The written statements can then be considered during the DHO's hearing.

(5) Only the DHO may directly question witnesses at the DHO's hearing. Any questions by you or your staff representative must be submitted to the DHO, who will present the question to the witness in his/her discretion.

(6) The DHO may consider evidence provided by a confidential informant (CI) that the DHO finds reliable. You will not be informed of the CI's identity. You will be informed of the CI's testimony to the extent it will not jeopardize institution security, at the DHO's discretion.

(g) Sanctions. If you committed a prohibited act(s), the DHO can impose any of the available sanctions listed in Tables 1 and 2.

(h) Written Report. You will receive a written copy of the DHO's decision following the hearing. The DHO is not required to prepare a verbatim record of the hearing. The DHO's written report will document the following:

(1) Whether you were advised of your rights during the DHO process;

(2) The evidence relied on by the DHO;

(3) The DHO's decision;

(4) The sanction imposed by the DHO; and

(5) The reason(s) for the sanction(s) imposed.

(i) Appeals. You may appeal the DHO's action(s) through the Administrative Remedy Program, 28 CFR part 542, subpart B.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 151 cases (90 in the last 5 years), 2011–2026 · leading case: William Lewis v. Warden Canaan USP, 664 F. App'x 153 (3rd Cir. 2016).
William Lewis v. Warden Canaan USP, 664 F. App'x 153 (3rd Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “Moreover, 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (f) places limits on the DHO’s discretion by requiring the decision to be based on some facts and, where there is conflicting evidence, on the greater weight of the evidence.”
Pinson v. Berkebile, 528 F. App'x 822 (10th Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “First, Petitioner incorrectly cites 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (h) to support his position that he cannot appeal until a DHO report is prepared.”
Markos Pappas v. Warden Allenwood USP, 548 F. App'x 31 (3rd Cir. 2013). · cites it 3× “Pap-pas had requested to have Ospina appear as a witness at his hearing; he maintains that Ospina would have testified that the cell phone belonged to him, not Pappas. The DHO report indicates that Ospina could not be called as a witness because he had been released from custody…”
Khary Ancrum v. Ronnie Holt, 506 F. App'x 95 (3rd Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “Nevertheless, Ancrum argues that he is entitled to relief because the Magistrate Judge explicitly stated that the DHO had not complied with 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (f)(6). 28 C.F.R. § 541.”
John McCarthy v. Warden Lewisburg USP, 631 F. App'x 84 (3rd Cir. 2015). “28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (f). The written decisions reflect that the conflicting evidence was considered, but that the DHOs found the greater weight of the evidence to indicate that McCarthy committed the alleged violations.”
Mark Green v. Fed. Det. Ctr., 528 F. App'x 160 (3rd Cir. 2013). “Wallace also claims that BOP officials violated 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (h), previously codified at 28 C.”
Miguel Guerrero v. Monica Recktenwald, 542 F. App'x 161 (3rd Cir. 2013). “However, that the notice of the disciplinary hearing did not explicitly charge Guerrero with insolence is of no consequence because pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (a)(1), a DHO has the authority to find that an inmate “committed the prohibited act(s) charged, and/or a similar…”
Johnson Obiegbu v. Robert Werlinger, 488 F. App'x 585 (3rd Cir. 2012). “The DHO had the authority to make this alternative finding, see 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (a)(1), and Obiegbu does not argue otherwise on appeal.”
Stephen Benson v. United States, 625 F. App'x 20 (3rd Cir. 2015). “We agree with the District Court that Benson’s due process right to' present witnesses was not violated by the DHO’s refusal to call Dr.”
Jorge Solano-Moreta v. D. Stephens, 536 F. App'x 314 (4th Cir. 2013). “17 (d) (2010) (same); Battle v. Barton, 970 F.2d 779, 782-83 (11th Cir.”
Szczerba v. Warden, Ft. Dix, Nj (D.N.J. 2022). · cites it 12× “A DHO hearing must be conducted pursuant to the procedures set forth at 28 C.F.R. § 541.8 . The procedures require the BOP to give inmates advance written notice of the charges no less than 24 hours before the DHO hearing.”
Richardson v. Ortiz (D.N.J. 2021). · cites it 10× “28 C.F.R. § 541.8 (c). If requested, the Warden must provide an inmate with a staff member to represent him at the DHO hearing.”
— 28 C.F.R. § 541.8(b) — 2 cases
Lillard v. Jacquez (D. Or. 2023).
Delly v. White (M.D. Penn. 2019).
— 28 C.F.R. § 541.8(f) — 3 cases
Jordan v. Howard (D. Ariz. 2021).
Phatdouang v. White (M.D. Penn. 2020).
Lora v. Peters (W.D. Pa. 2025).
— 28 C.F.R. § 541.8(f)(2017) — 2 cases
Ama v. Moser (W.D. Pa. 2022).
Martinez v. Underwood (W.D. Pa. 2025).
— 28 C.F.R. § 541.8(g) — 1 case
Roberts v. Williams (S.D. Ill. 2021).
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.