(caption unavailable)

1Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions
that have no precedential value and merely decide particular
cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes
needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
for the Fifth Circuit
_____________________________________
No. 93-1296
Summary Calendar
_____________________________________
FRANK ROGER MILLARD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
JOHN C. CREUZOT, Judge of
Criminal District Court #4,
Defendant-Appellee,
______________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
3:92 CV 2392 P
______________________________________________________
June 3, 1993
Before KING, DAVIS and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
Millard appeals the dismissal of his § 1983 action against Texas
state Judge Creuzot. We affirm.
I.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Frank Roger Millard is currently in the custody in the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice serving the remainder of a 35-year
sentence imposed following parole revocation.
Miller contends he is entitled to a two-year credit against
the length of his current sentence because a prior conviction was
subsequently overturned by Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. He
also seeks monetary damages. The magistrate judge entered
findings, conclusions, and recommended dismissal of Millard's suit
for damages because of immunity judicial officers enjoy. The
district court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and
dismissed the case.
II.
This Court generally bars consideration of § 1983 claims that
directly or indirectly challenge the constitutionality of a state
conviction or sentencing decision prior to exhaustion of habeas
remedies. Serio v. Members of La. State Bd. of Pardons, 821 F.2d
1112, 1117 (5th Cir. 1987). The exhaustion requirement "is based
on the comity-inspired principle that state courts should be given
first opportunity to rule on the merits of a prisoner's claim
attacking the constitutionality of the fact or duration of his
incarceration." Id. at 1114 (citation omitted). Millard's
contention that he is entitled to a two-year credit against his
current term of incarceration would ordinarily be pursued through
habeas corpus.
However, Judge Creuzot is entitled to absolute immunity, and
thus, even if Millard's claim is deserving of habeas relief, Judge

-- 2 of 3 --

3
Creuzot would not be liable for monetary damages. Young v.
Biggers, 938 F.2d 565, 569 n.5 (5th Cir. 1991); Serio, 821 F.2d
1114-15. Because dismissal of this action resolves none of the
merits underlying Millard's state law claim, there is no "sound
basis to defer decision on the immunity issue." Id. at 1115. We
therefore affirm the district court's judgment.
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --