Court Opinion

ID: 9891597
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-19 00:00:40.006652+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.705979
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40765        Document: 00516935937             Page: 1      Date Filed: 10/18/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit                                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit

                                     ____________                                     FILED
                                                                               October 18, 2023
                                      No. 22-40765                               Lyle W. Cayce
                                    Summary Calendar                                  Clerk
                                    ____________

   Norris Hicks,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                            versus

   Texas Board of Pardon and Paroles, each member in official
   capacity; David Guiterriez, Chairman, Texas Board of Pardons and
   Paroles; Ressie Owens, Chairman, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles;
   Paul Keil, Board member/Commissioner, Texas Board of Pardons and
   Paroles; John LNU; Jane LNU,

                                              Defendants—Appellees.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Eastern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 6:22-CV-134
                     ______________________________

   Before Jones, Smith, and Dennis, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Norris Hicks, Texas prisoner # 505593, filed a pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983
   complaint, arguing that his constitutional rights of due process and equal

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-40765       Document: 00516935937          Page: 2    Date Filed: 10/18/2023

                                     No. 22-40765

   protection were violated when he was denied parole numerous times. He
   appeals the district court’s dismissal of his § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C.
   § 1915A(b)(1) as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief
   may be granted.
          First, Hicks challenges the dismissal of his due process claims.
   Because Texas laws and regulations do not create a constitutionally protected
   liberty interest in parole, the district court did not err in dismissing Hicks’s
   due process claims. See Johnson v. Rodriguez, 110 F.3d 299, 308 (5th Cir.
   1997); see also Carlucci v. Chapa, 884 F.3d 534, 537-38 (5th Cir. 2018). Next,
   Hicks’s challenge to the dismissal of his equal protection claim is likewise
   unavailing. See Gibson v. Tex. Dep’t of Ins.-Div. of Workers’ Comp., 700 F.3d
   227, 238 (5th Cir. 2012); Johnson, 110 F.3d at 306-07. Last, Hicks argues that
   the defendants were not entitled to immunity and that the district court erred
   in failing to rule on this issue. We are not required to address this alternative
   argument for or against dismissal and decline to do so now. See United States
   v. Rafoi, 60 F.4th 982, 995 (5th Cir. 2023).
          AFFIRMED.

                                              2