Eugene Fred Connor v. Wayne Estelle, Warden

Eugene Fred Connor appeals pro se the denial of his habeas corpus petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Connor was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment under California’s Indeterminate Sentencing Law (ISL). Following his sentencing, California repealed the ISL and enacted the current Determinate Sentencing Law (DSL). Connor has been considered for parole under the DSL’s guidelines on four separate occasions. Each time he was found unsuitable for release.

The DSL adopted a two-stage approach to parole decisions. First, a prisoner must be found suitable for parole under the DSL guidelines. Once this occurs, a date is set for his release. Connor argues that by considering him for parole under the DSL guidelines, rather than the ISL guidelines, the Board of Prison Terms (BPT) violated the prohibition against ex post facto laws. He also contends the BPT denied him equal protection under the law and violated his right to due process.

DISCUSSION

“The ex post facto prohibition forbids the Congress and the States to enact any law ‘which imposes a punishment for an act which was not punishable at the time it was committed;…