Smith v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, 98 F.3d 1350 (10th Cir. 1996)

George Wright Smith Jr., appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants. Mr. Smith brought this suit under the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the Defendants violated his right to due process and conspired against him in retaliation for having filed a previous lawsuit. He claims that this conspiracy resulted in the termination of his employment at the Oklahoma State Industries furniture factory, a position which, if performed satisfactorily, would generate good time credit of two days for each day worked. Mr. Smith was reassigned to the Captain's Yard Crew, which allowed him to earn one day of good time credit for each day worked.

Contrary to Mr. Smith's argument, the Oklahoma statute creating good time credits does not bestow upon inmates a property or liberty interest in the opportunity to earn those credits. Williams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 998 (10th Cir. 1991); Ingram v. Papalia, 804 F.2d 595, 596-97 (10th Cir. 1986); Twyman v. Crisp, 584 F.2d 352, 356 (10th Cir. 1978). The district court properly granted summary judgment on Mr. Smith's retaliation claim for lack of a factual basis.

Mr. Smith also raises two additional issues for the first time in this appeal. He argues that he should have been paroled from his first sentence and that consequently he should now be serving his second sentence. He also argues that he should be serving his two sentences concurrently instead of consecutively. Review of the record indicates that these issues were not raised below. We will not consider on appeal issues that were not raised before the district court. Olguin v. Lucero, 87 F.3d 401, 405 (10th Cir. 1996), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Sept. 6, 1996) (No. 96-5886); Walker v. Mather (In re Walker), 959 F.2d 894, 896 (10th Cir. 1992).

AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.