Case ID: sw2d_897/html/0623-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Harry TETTAMBLE, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Paul CASPARI and Barbara Smith, Respondents.
    No. 66288.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Jan. 31, 1995.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 7, 1995.
    Harry Tettamble, pro se.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., John Munich, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Joseph S. Lawder, Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for respondents.
    Before AHRENS, P.J., and SIMON and KAROHL, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In this action for declaratory relief, petitioner Harry Tettamble appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of respondents, prison officials where petitioner is incarcerated. Petitioner alleged that respondents are denying him good time credit under § 558.041 RSMo in a manner which violates his due process rights and which is an ex post facto violation. We affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).