Background
Rodney Douglas Eaves, an inmate and member of the Sac and Fox Tribe, wore eagle feathers in his hair for religious reasons. A prison employee ordered him to remove them, citing the Code of Penal Discipline. Eaves refused and was charged with disobeying a lawful order.
After a March 2023 disciplinary hearing, a hearing officer found Eaves guilty and imposed a thirty-day loss-of-privileges sanction, probated for sixty days. The prison’s final written disposition was issued March 27 and served March 29, 2023. Eaves later pursued administrative challenges, including a claim that the sergeant who acted as prosecutor had not been authorized to do so, and filed a C.R.C.P. 106.5 petition on March 4, 2024.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal. It held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Eaves filed his C.R.C.P. 106.5 petition far more than twenty-eight days after the prison’s final disciplinary decision.
The twenty-eight-day filing period is jurisdictional and strictly enforced. Eaves’s opening brief did not challenge the district court’s timeliness and jurisdiction rulings, and every appellate issue sought reversal of the disciplinary conviction. The court therefore did not reach his six merits arguments.
Key Takeaways
- A C.R.C.P. 106.5 challenge to a prison disciplinary conviction must be filed within twenty-eight days of the final decision.
- Missing that deadline deprives the district court of subject matter jurisdiction.
- An appellant who does not challenge the dispositive jurisdictional ruling cannot obtain review of underlying disciplinary claims.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that Colorado inmates seeking judicial review of prison discipline must act promptly after the final disposition. Later administrative challenges do not avoid the jurisdictional deadline for filing the Rule 106.5 petition.