Filed: Nov. 27, 1995
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50677 Summary Calendar _ BILLIE RAY BEESON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RONALD L. VALLADRES; MICHAEL F. MILLER; WILLIAM H. BROOKS, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-95-CV-352 - - - - - - - - - - December 21, 1995 Before KING, SMITH, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Texas prisoner Billie Ray Beeson alleges that members of
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50677 Summary Calendar _ BILLIE RAY BEESON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RONALD L. VALLADRES; MICHAEL F. MILLER; WILLIAM H. BROOKS, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-95-CV-352 - - - - - - - - - - December 21, 1995 Before KING, SMITH, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Texas prisoner Billie Ray Beeson alleges that members of ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-50677
Summary Calendar
__________________
BILLIE RAY BEESON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
RONALD L. VALLADRES; MICHAEL F. MILLER;
WILLIAM H. BROOKS,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. A-95-CV-352
- - - - - - - - - -
December 21, 1995
Before KING, SMITH, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Texas prisoner Billie Ray Beeson alleges that members of the
Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles (Board) violated ex post facto
principles by extending the period between his parole
reconsideration hearings from one year to two years. The change
in parole review procedures did not violate the Ex Post Facto
Clause. See Allison v. Kyle,
66 F.3d 71, 74 (5th Cir. 1995).
*
Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions
that have no precedential value and merely decide particular
cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes
needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
No. 95-50677
-2-
We decline to consider Beeson's arguments concerning the
merits of the Board's decision to deny him parole and the
handling of the case by the magistrate judge because Beeson did
not raise those issues in the district court. Varnado v.
Lynaugh,
920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991).
AFFIRMED.