Filed: Feb. 13, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50453 Summary Calendar JEREMY M. LANGE, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-00-CV-51-HG - February 8, 2001 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jeremy Lange (“Lange”) was granted a certificate of appealability
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50453 Summary Calendar JEREMY M. LANGE, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-00-CV-51-HG - February 8, 2001 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jeremy Lange (“Lange”) was granted a certificate of appealability ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50453
Summary Calendar
JEREMY M. LANGE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-00-CV-51-HG
--------------------
February 8, 2001
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jeremy Lange (“Lange”) was granted a certificate of
appealability (“COA”) to appeal the district court’s denial of
federal habeas relief on his contention that the appellee
violated the Thirteenth Amendment and the Ex Post Facto Clause by
requiring him to perform labor.
As a preliminary matter, Lange’s motion to extend his COA is
DENIED. Lange has made no attempt to make the threshold
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right with
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-50453
-2-
respect to the denial of his claims alleging violations of the
Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses and the doctrine of
separation of powers. See United States v. Kimler,
150 F.3d 429,
431 & n.1 (5th Cir. 1998).
This court may “affirm the district court’s judgment on any
grounds supported by the record.” Sojourner T v. Edwards,
974
F.2d 27, 30 (5th Cir. 1992). The district court’s denial of
Lange’s ex post facto and thirteenth amendment claims is affirmed
on the grounds that the claims are not cognizable in a habeas
corpus petition. A favorable determination on Lange’s ex post
facto and thirteenth amendment claims would not automatically
entitle him to an accelerated release. See Carson v. Johnson,
112 F.3d 818, 820-21 (5th Cir. 1997).
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO EXTEND COA DENIED.