Higgins v. Briggs, 876 P.2d 539 (Alaska App. 1994) involved a prisoner who sought judicial review of the Department of Corrections' decision to take away his good time credit for alleged misbehavior. After the superior court denied relief, Higgins filed an appeal. The Court ruled that the underlying superior court litigation should have been filed as an administrative appeal. Id. at 542. The Court further ruled that, because the underlying superior court litigation should have been treated as an administrative appeal, Higgins's appeal of the superior court's decision should have been taken to the supreme court under AS 22.05.010(c). Thus, the Court concluded that we did not have jurisdiction to hear Higgins's appeal of the superior court's decision. Id. at 543-44. The Court said that under McGinnis v. Stevens, an inmate's "sole procedural mechanism for challenging a Department of Corrections disciplinary decision was an administrative appeal." Higgins was challenging disciplinary decisions that had resulted in what he claimed was an excessive loss of his "good time" credit. After analyzing supreme court decisions, the Court concluded that Higgins's "sole procedural mechanism" for challenging the revocations of his good time was an administrative appeal.