Opinion ID: 812350
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Ground Two

Text: Mr. Kinkead next argues that Oklahoma is applying his sentence in violation of the Constitution by denying him earned credits. Aplt. Br. 2, 15–17. We note that this is a slight variation of the claim Mr. Kinkead raised in his habeas petition, where he alleged that he was wrongly subject to Oklahoma’s 85% Rule. Mr. Kinkead now contends that his sentence, “life imprisonment with all but the first ten years suspended,” is not life sentence, and therefore, Okla. Stat. tit. 57, § 138(A), which prevents those inmates serving life sentences from earning credits, does not apply to him. Id. As the district court found, Mr. Kinkead is serving a sentence of life imprisonment, even though all but the first ten years were deferred. Kinkead, 2012 WL 2995667, at . We do not believe that reasonable jurists could fairly debate this conclusion.