Wilson v. Warden USP Beaumont ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 01-40448
    Summary Calendar
    ALFRED L. WILSON
    Petitioner - Appellant
    v.
    WARDEN U.S. PENITENTIARY BEAUMONT; US PAROLE COMMISSION
    Respondents - Appellees
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Texas
    USDC No. 1:99-CV-193
    --------------------
    November 12, 2001
    Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and BENAVIDES, Circuit
    Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Alfred L. Wilson, federal prisoner # 98870-131, appeals the
    denial of his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2241
     petition in which he challenged
    the revocation of his parole.   He first avers that he was denied
    his due process right to personally confront the victim during
    her testimony at the parole-revocation hearing.
    Although Wilson was not allowed to remain in the room during
    the victim’s testimony at the revocation hearing, his attorney
    was present, and he was given the opportunity to cross-examine
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
    except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
    R. 47.5.4.
    No. 01-40448
    -2-
    the victim.   Accordingly, Wilson was afforded the minimum
    procedural due process requirements.     See Morrissey v. Brewer,
    
    408 U.S. 471
    , 489 (1972).
    We also reject Wilson’s challenge to the sufficiency of the
    evidence.   A review of the record reveals that the Parole
    Commission had “some evidence” from which to conclude that Wilson
    was guilty of the offense of rape, including the police
    investigation file and the testimony of Wilson, the victim,
    Wilson’s parole officer, the police investigator, and the
    victim’s mother and grandfather.     See Villarreal v. United States
    Parole Comm’n, 
    985 F.2d 835
    , 839 (5th Cir. 1993).     The judgment
    of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-40448

Filed Date: 11/14/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2014