Sutton v. Johnson
This text of Sutton v. Johnson (Sutton v. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20998 Conference Calendar
MICHAEL JOE SUTTON,
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 Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-3128 - - - - - - - - - - October 18, 2000 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael Joe Sutton, Texas prisoner # 459428, appeals the
district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application. A
certificate of appealability (COA) was previously granted. The
respondent has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as moot and a
motion to supplement the record with a copy of Sutton’s
certificate of mandatory supervision showing that Sutton was
released to mandatory supervision on August 9, 2000. The
respondent’s arguments are meritorious. Sutton has not shown an
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 99-20998 -2-
injury-in-fact, and his habeas claims are moot due to his release
to mandatory supervision. Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7
(1998); see Ex parte Hallmark, 883 S.W.2d 672, 674 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1994) (good-time credits apply only to an inmate’s
eligibility for parole or mandatory supervision and do not affect
the length of the inmate’s sentence). Further, revocation of
Sutton’s mandatory supervision would not result in the
restoration of his good-time credits. See Hallmark v. Johnson,
118 F.3d 1073, 1075-76 (5th Cir. 1997). The respondent’s motions
are GRANTED, and this APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS MOOT.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Sutton v. Johnson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutton-v-johnson-ca5-2000.