Rivas v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID

Filing 6

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION and DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS re: 5 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation. (Ordered by Senior Judge Mary Lou Robinson on 10/26/2017) (awc)

IN THE T]NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTzuCT OF TEXAS
AMARILLO DIVISION

CARLOS zuVAS,
Petitioner,

2:17-CY-195
LORIE DAVIS, Director,
Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Correctional Institutions Division,
Respondent.

ORDER ADQPTING FINDINGS. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
ANd DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Petitioner has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus challenging a state prison

disciplinary decision. On October 4,2077, the United States Magistrate Judge issued findings,
conclusions and a recommendation in this cause, recommending therein that the habeas

application be denied because petitioner is not eligible for mandatory supervised release. No
objections to the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation have been filed as of this date.

"As

a general

rule, only sanctions which result in loss of good conduct time credits for

inmates who are eligible for release on mandatory supervision or which otherwise directly and
adversely affect release on mandatory supervision will impose upon a liberty interest." Spicer

v.

Collins, g F.Supp. 2d 673,685 (E.D. Tex. 1998) (citing Orellqnq v. Kyle,65 F.3d 29,31-33 (sth

Cir. 1995), cert. denied,516 U.S. 1059 (1996)). Petitioner is not eligible for release on
mandatory supervision; therefore, any forfeited good time credits apply only toward his eligibility

for parole. Prisoners in Texas possess no constitutionally protected right to release on parole

as

such release is discretionary. Because petitioner is ineligible for early release under the Texas

mandatory supervision scheme, he has no constitutionally protected interest in previously earned
good-time credits.
The undersigned United States District Judge has made an independent examination

of

the record in this case. The Magistrate Judge's Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation is
hereby

ADOPTED. Accordingly, the application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by petitioner is

DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
ENTERED

this

26t}n

day

of

Octobe.r

2017.

sl Uary Lou Robinson
MARY LOU ROBINSON
LINITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE