Filed: Mar. 19, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-60500 Summary Calendar KENNETH IVEY ELASTER, Petitioner, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent. - - - - - - - - - - Petition for Review of an Order of the United States Parole Commission (18 USC 4106A) - - - - - - - - - - March 18, 2002 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Kenneth Ivey Elaster, a federal prisoner transferred to the United States pursuant to the Treaty on the Ex
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-60500 Summary Calendar KENNETH IVEY ELASTER, Petitioner, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent. - - - - - - - - - - Petition for Review of an Order of the United States Parole Commission (18 USC 4106A) - - - - - - - - - - March 18, 2002 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Kenneth Ivey Elaster, a federal prisoner transferred to the United States pursuant to the Treaty on the Exe..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-60500
Summary Calendar
KENNETH IVEY ELASTER,
Petitioner,
versus
UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION,
Respondent.
- - - - - - - - - -
Petition for Review of an Order of the
United States Parole Commission
(18 USC 4106A)
- - - - - - - - - -
March 18, 2002
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kenneth Ivey Elaster, a federal prisoner transferred to the
United States pursuant to the Treaty on the Execution of Penal
Sentences (Treaty), November 25, 1976, United States--Mexico, 20
U.S.T. 7399; T.I.A.S. No. 8718, appeals from the United States
Parole Commission’s determination of his release date. Elaster
argues that he was denied due process because the Parole
Commission relied on inaccurate information in determining his
sentence and did not afford him a hearing. He also contends that
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-60500
-2-
he should have received a downward departure under U.S.S.G.
§§ 5K2.10 and 5K2.12.
Elaster is essentially seeking to challenge the facts as
found by the Mexican court of conviction. According to the terms
of the transfer treaty, he is prohibited from doing so. See
Treaty Art. II(6) and Art. VI; 18 U.S.C. § 4108(b)(1). Elaster’s
assertion that he is entitled to downward departures under the
sentencing guidelines also lacks merit. See Navarette v. United
States Parole Comm’n,
34 F.3d 316, 319 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.