Michael Britt Hodges v. Mike Huckabee

PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate Michael Britt Hodges appeals from the district court’s 1 28 U.S.C. § 1915A dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, in which Hodges alleged that his constitutional rights were violated when Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee denied his clemency application. Having carefully reviewed the record and appellant’s brief, we agree with the district court that the complaint failed to state a claim. See Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (de novo review). Hodges’s due process claim fails because the clemency statute imposes no standards, criteria, or factors which the *337 Board may or may not consider in making its recommendation, and he did not otherwise describe a due process violation. See Perry v. Brownlee, 122 F.3d 20, 23 (8th Cir.1997) (per curiam) (because Arkansas clemency statute does not impose standards as to when clemency must be granted, it does not create constitutional right or entitlement sufficient to invoke Due Process Clause). Hodges’s equal protection claim also fails because he has not alleged that he is a member of a protected class, see Seltzer-Bey v. Delo, 66 F.3d 961, 964 (8th Cir.1995), or explained how he is similarly situated to those prisoners whose clemency applications were granted, see Klinger v. Dep’t of Corr., 31 F.3d 727, 731 (8th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1185, 115 S.Ct. 1177, 130 L.Ed.2d 1130 (1995). Accordingly, we affirm, and we deny Hodges’s motion for appointment of counsel. Footnotes [1] The Honorable Henry Woods, late a United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.