IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-21142
Conference Calendar
CARLOS R. RIVERA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; BELINGER, Warden; J. BARROT; MR. TAYLOR;
J. NORRIS, Mr.; MR. DIXON; MR. HENDERSON; K. RAMSEY,,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-97-CV-2996
--------------------
October 19, 1999
Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Carlos R. Rivera, Texas prisoner number 431906, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his complaint against Texas
Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) Director Gary Johnson, TDCJ
Warden Belinger, and six TDCJ employees. Rivera’s motion for
appointment of appellate counsel is DENIED.
Rivera alleged in the district court that he was charged
with a disciplinary violation in retaliation for his report of
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 98-21142
-2-
misconduct by prison officers and that he was convicted of the
charge in a disciplinary proceeding which violated his right to
procedural and substantive due process. Rivera sought
compensatory and punitive damages, the restoration of his prior
inmate status and forfeited good time credits, and injunctive
relief.
Rivera’s arguments concerning the constitutionality of the
prison disciplinary proceeding are not cognizable under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 because favorable action on his claims would render his
disciplinary conviction invalid. Clarke v. Stalder, 154 F.3d
186, 189 (5th Cir. 1998)(en banc), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 1052
(1999); see Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 648-49 (1997). To
the extent that Rivera seeks restoration of his good time
credits, his sole remedy sounds in habeas corpus. Balisok, 520
U.S. at 643-44; Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973).
Rivera has no constitutional right protecting him against a
change in custody classification. See Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d
256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988). Rivera has abandoned his claims for
injunctive relief by failing to argue them on appeal. Brinkmann
v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th
Cir. 1987); FED. R. APP. P. 28(a)(6).
Rivera admits that he committed the conduct on which the
disciplinary conviction was based; therefore, he has failed to
establish that he would not have been convicted in the absence of
a retaliatory motive. Woods v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1164 (5th
Cir. 1995); see Johnson v. Rodriguez, 110 F.3d 299, 310 (5th
Cir.), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 559 (1997).
No. 98-21142
-3-
Accordingly, the district court’s dismissal of the complaint
is AFFIRMED.
AFFIRMED. MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED.