some evidence to uphold prison disciplinary proceeding); Choice v. Coughlin, 1996 WL 325627 (S.D.N.Y.1996) (decision to confine inmate the SHU based on plaintiff's letter constitutes “some evidence”); Cardenas v. Wigen, 921 F.Supp. 286, 289 (E.D.Pa.1996) (“some evidence” standard may be satisfied by application of the constructive possession doctrine). 6 . See also Powell v. Coughlin, 953 F.2d 744 (2d Cir. 1991) (error for district court to overturn disciplinary adjudication and order ex-pungement of prisoner's record without inquiring whether the violation had any effect upon the outcome of the proceeding where hearing officer violated court order establishing procedural requirements for prison disciplinary proceedings); Von Kahl v. Brennan, 855 F.Supp. 1413, 1421 (M.D.Pa.1994) (<HOLDING>); Laird v. McBride, 858 F.Supp. 822
holding petitioner must show prejudice to prevail on due process claim holding that where the minimal requirements of due process have been met an inmate must show prejudice when a particular regulation is not complied with before a federal court will intervene holding that an alien must show error and substantial prejudice in order to prevail on a due process claim holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate holding that to show prejudice petitioners must show that the bia could plausibly have determined that they met the eligibility requirements of suspension of deportation