Pickett v. Johnson

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-40988
Summary Calendar
JAMES ROBARD PICKETT,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. G-98-CV-43
--------------------
July 12, 2000
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
James Robard Pickett, Texas prisoner #563936, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his habeas petition. The district
court granted Pickett a certificate of appealability as to a
single issue -- whether he was improperly denied credit for time
served at a drug rehabilitation facility as a condition of
remaining on parole. Because Pickett argued in the district
court and on appeal that he was due the credit as a matter of
state law, we affirm the dismissal of his habeas petition. We

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 99-40988
-2-
1 We do not consider Pickett’s federal constitutional
arguments because he did not raise them until his reply brief on
appeal. See Unida v. Levi Strauss & Co., 986 F.2d 970, 976 n.4.
(5th Cir. 1993) (holding that an argument first raised in a reply
brief is waived).
are not empowered to oversee alleged errors under state law.
See, e.g., Cronnon v. Alabama, 587 F.2d 246, 250 (5th Cir. 1979)
(“we do not sit as a ‘super’ state supreme court in a habeas
corpus proceeding”).1
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --