IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-41276
Summary Calendar
STEVEN DAILLE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON, Director,
Texas Department of Criminal
Justice, Institutional Division
Respondent-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:96-CV-603
- - - - - - - - - -
December 17, 1998
Before KING, GARWOOD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Steven Daille, Texas prisoner no. 623089, appeals the
district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition. The
district court correctly determined that Daille was not entitled
to mandatory supervised release. See TEX. GOV’T. CODE ANN.
§ 508.149(a)(5)(formerly TEX. CRIM. PRO. CODE ANN. art. 42.18
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 96-41276
-2-
§ 8(c)(4)). Liberal construction of Daille’s habeas petition and
other pleadings indicates that he also raised issues regarding
his eligibility for and/or entitlement to parole.
We granted COA, limited to the issues (1) whether Daille
raised an argument pursuant to Tex. Govt. Code Ann. § 508.145(d)
(formerly Tex. Crim Pro. Code. Ann. 42.18 § 8(b)(3)); (2) whether
Daille’s brief may be read to allege a violation of the Ex Post
Facto Clause; (3) whether any such violation was asserted in the
district court; and (4) whether such violation may provide
grounds for relief.
Respondent has filed a brief admitting that Daille raises an
argument under Tex. Govt. Code Ann. § 508.145(d) and that he
asserts an Ex Post Facto Clause argument. Respondent asserts
that Daille did not raise this issue in the district court, that
the claims are unexhausted, that exhaustion would be procedurally
barred, and that Daille is not entitled to relief on the merits.
We pretermit the issues whether Daille raised his Ex Post
Facto Clause argument before the district court and whether the
claim is exhausted. Assuming, arguendo, that the argument is
properly before this court, Daille is not entitled to relief.
Section 508.145(d) of the Tex. Govt. Code Ann. and its
predacessor, Tex. Crim Pro. Code. Ann. 42.18 § 8(b)(3), concern
a prisoner’s eligibility for parole. Daille is and has been
eligible for parole since 1993. Daille thus cannot demonstrate
that he has been adversely affected by changes in the parole law
made subsequent to his conviction.
AFFIRMED.