Case Name: Harry TETTAMBLE, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Paul CASPARI and Barbara Smith, Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-01-31
Citations: 897 S.W.2d 623
Docket Number: No. 66288
Parties: Harry TETTAMBLE, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Paul CASPARI and Barbara Smith, Respondents.
Judges: Before AHRENS, P.J., and SIMON and KAROHL, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 897
Pages: 623–623

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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).