U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1998

Armstrong v. Rodriguez

Armstrong v. Rodriguez
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided May 25, 1998

Armstrong v. Rodriguez

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-50855 Summary Calendar

GERALD T. ARMSTRONG, Petitioner-Appellant, versus VICTOR RODRIGUEZ (T.D.L.J. - P.P.D.); TOMMY THOMAS, Sheriff of Harris County, Texas, Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-96-CV-214 - - - - - - - - - - May 18, 1998 Before DUHE’, DeMOSS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:* Gerald T. Armstrong (#768439) has appealed the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Armstrong has moved: to strike the appellee’s supplement to the record; to supplement the record with portions of a transcript of a state court suppression hearing; and for production of state records. The motions are DENIED.

The respondent has moved for an order compelling Armstrong to produce the entire transcript of the suppression hearing. The * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 97-50855 -2- motion is DENIED AS MOOT.

Armstrong contends that a warrantless arrest led to the revocation of his mandatory supervised release and the loss of his accumulated good-time credits. Armstrong also contends that the his mandatory supervised release and accumulated good-time credits were revoked because he had violated conditions imposed by statutes which were applied to him in violation of his rights under the Ex Post Facto Clause. Based upon a careful review of the record and the briefs, and essentially for reasons stated by the district court, see Armstrong v. Rodriguez, No. A 96-CA-214 SS (W.D. Tex. Aug. 18, 1997) (unpublished), the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; MOTIONS DENIED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.