U.S. District Court: REVOCATION.

Woodley v. Department of Corrections, 74 F.Supp.2d 623 (E.D.Va. 1999). An inmate petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his parole revocation and a policy of the parole board that required him to serve the total remaining time of his sentence without consideration of good time allowances he had earned. The district court dismissed the action, finding that the revocation of the inmates parole for failing to agree to pay the costs of living at a halfway house presented no cognizable constitutional grounds for habeas relief. The court found that the inmate had received all the constitutional due process to which he was entitled and that a policy change by the board did not violate the inmate's equal protection rights or create an ex post facto application of the law. The parole board had changed its policy to require that all persons violating parole after a certain date must serve the entire unserved portion of the term originally imposed by the court. (Virginia Parole Board and Onesimus House, Virg inia)