Thomasv.Cockrell

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, San Angelo DivisionFeb 12, 2002
Civil Action No. 6:00-CV-094-C (N.D. Tex. Feb. 12, 2002)

Civil Action No. 6:00-CV-094-C

February 12, 2002


ORDER


CUMMINGS, Judge

The Court has considered the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by Petitioner Joe Albert Thomas. Respondent has filed an Answer with Brief in Support and attached copies of Petitioner's relevant state parole records Respondent also filed copies of Petitioner's state habeas records. Petitioner has filed a response and objections to the answer.

Respondent has lawful and valid custody of Petitioner pursuant to a judgment and sentence in cause number 12,160, styled The State of Texas v. Joe Albert Thomas, in the 5th Judicial District Court of Brown County. Texas. Petitioner was indicted in cause number 12,160 on December 7, 1990, for the felony offense of forgery by making and passing and two prior convictions were alleged to enhance punishment. On April 15, 1991, Petitioner pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargain agreement and was sentenced to eight (8) years' incarceration in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, institutional Division. Petitioner was subsequently released to mandatory supervision on three separate occasions, but his release was revoked each rime.

Petitioner does not challenge his original conviction and sentence in the instant petition; rather, he argues that he has been denied time credits on his sentence, his discharge date has been erroneously changed, and he has been incarcerated beyond the expiration of his sentence. He has filed two state applications challenging the revocation of his releases to mandatory supervision and the denial of time credits. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed the first application on May 10, 2000, and denied the second application without written order on September 29. 2000.

The Court has reviewed Petitioner's Petition. Respondent's Answer with Brief in Support, Petitioner's response and objections, and the state-court records. The Court finds that for the reasons set forth in Respondent's Answer and the accompanying brief, Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the denial of relief by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court law. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). Accordingly, Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus should be denied and dismissed with prejudice.

SO ORDERED.

JUDGMENT

For the reasons stated in the Court's Order of even date,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the above-styled and numbered cause is dismissed with prejudice.