When a fighting incident occurs at a California state facility, everyone suspected of involvement typically gets placed in the SHU while the investigation runs. That is standard protocol and does not by itself mean the outcome is predetermined against him. The Special Investigations Services unit gets involved and the incident gets reviewed, including any available camera footage. Contrary to what it might feel like from the outside, those cameras do get looked at. If footage exists, a committee will review it and the final incident report will reflect what the recording actually shows.
To formally contest the write-up, he needs to request a disciplinary hearing, which he is entitled to. At that hearing, he can present his account of what happened, request that the camera footage be reviewed as evidence, and identify any witnesses who can speak to what occurred. He should put everything in writing and keep copies of anything he submits. If the footage contradicts the guard's account, that is his strongest argument.
California inmates also have the right to file a 602 grievance appeal if they believe the disciplinary process was handled improperly. That creates a formal paper trail and moves the matter up the chain if the initial hearing does not go his way.
On the early release and NVSS program question: a pending write-up and SHU placement will typically pause or block program eligibility until the matter is resolved. If the charge is reversed or reduced following the hearing, he should have grounds to be reconsidered. He or his attorney should make that request explicitly once any reversal is in hand, because the system will not automatically revisit the early release decision on its own.
The most important thing right now is that he engages the process formally, in writing, and keeps documentation of every step.
Thank you for trying AMP!
You got lucky! We have no ad to show to you!