Spalding

MEMORANDUM ***

The commencement of prison disciplinary proceedings before the criminal trial on Dallas’s escape charge did not violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Even rights “basic to a fair hearing” are “necessarily circumscribed by the penological need to provide swift discipline in individual cases.” Ponte v. Real, 471 U.S. 491, 495 , 105 S.Ct. 2192 , 85 L.Ed.2d 553 (1985). See also Ryan v. Montana, 580 F.2d 988, 993 (9th Cir.1978), cert, denied, 440 U.S. 977 , 99 S.Ct. 1548 , 59 L.Ed.2d 796 (1979).

Nor did the hearing officer’s limited consideration of Dallas’s silence in his prison hearing violate due process. Because Dallas’s silence “in and of itself [was] insufficient to support an adverse decision,” the hearing officer’s partial reliance on it did “not smack of an invalid attempt by the state to compel testimony ... or to penalize the exercise of the [Fifth Amendment] privilege.” Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 317-18 , 96 S.Ct. 1551 , 47 *671 L.Ed.2d 810 (1976). See also Ryan, 580 F.2d at 992-93 .

The state’s refusal to reinstate Dallas’s good time credits after his subsequent acquittal of a criminal escape charge did not violate due…