Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-07054/USCOURTS-ca10-91-07054-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
R. Michael Cody
Appellee
Bruce L. Rowbottom
Appellant
The Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Appellee

Document Text:

FI LED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

BRUCE L. ROWBOTTOM, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v. 

R. MICHAEL CODY; THE ATTORNEY 

GENERAL OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA 

Respondents-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

AUG 7 1991 

ROBERT L HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 91-7054 

(D. C. No. 91-071-S) 

( E. D. Okla. ) 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The cause is therefore ordered 

Mr. Rowbottom, a state prisoner, filed a pro se application 

for habeas corpus relief wherein he challenged neither his 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 91-7054 Document: 010110131439 Date Filed: 08/07/1991 Page: 1 
• \ 

' conviction nor sentence but rather the application of Oklahoma's 

Prison Overcrowding Act. Specifically, Mr. Rowbottom contended he 

was entitled to additional emergency credits against his sentence. 

The district court denied relief holding the habeas petition 

failed to raise federal constitutional questions. 

appeals prose. 

Mr. Rowbottom 

Mr. Rowbottom was convicted in state court in 1989 of 

unlawful delivery of a controlled dangerous substance with two 

prior convictions and was sentenced to twenty years. Mr. 

Rowbottom filed a mandamus action in state court asserting it was 

unconstitutional to withhold emergency time credits under Oklahoma 

law. Mr. Rowbottom was unsuccessful in state court. Mr. 

Rowbottom's petition in federal court alleged the state's refusal 

to grant him emergency time credits violated his equal protection 

and due process rights. 

Mr. Rowbottom does not meet the requirements of an emergency 

time credit provision which is found in the Oklahoma Prison 

Overcrowding Act. This provision states an individual is not 

entitled to emergency time credits if he is incarcerated as an 

Oklahoma repeat offender. See Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 57 § 573(3) 

(West 1991). Mr. Rowbottom argues he is not a repeat offender for 

purposes of Oklahoma law because his prior convictions occurred in 

Kansas, and not in Oklahoma. This argument was expressly rejected 

by the Oklahoma courts in their interpretation of Oklahoma law. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-7054 Document: 010110131439 Date Filed: 08/07/1991 Page: 2 
In his appeal to us Mr. Rowbottom argues the Oklahoma courts 

erred. He asserts he is eligible to receive the emergency time 

credits. 

Mr. Rowbottom's argument to this court fails because we are 

not allowed to displace Oklahoma's interpretation of its own law. 

There is no federal due process or equal protection violation in 

Oklahoma's decision to characterize prior convictions from other 

states as prior Oklahoma convictions for purposes of the emergency 

time credit provision of the Oklahoma Prison Overcrowding Act. 

We grant the certificate of probable cause. This court 

previously granted Mr. Rowbottom permission to proceed in forma 

pauperis. Having done so, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district 

court. 

Entered for the Court: 

WADE BRORBY 

Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 91-7054 Document: 010110131439 Date Filed: 08/07/1991 Page: 3