WPC 8#  UN+ %y 0(w@ 0l 0D]4ey D3U, 0J 0T9 0^ 0h 0rS 0| 0A 0 1uW U, 0d 0@\ B U, U> AO# r 0D8 0D| D/ B U6 B)BDCk AMU*#%ZHv~v HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ [UEEӀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5((3$ !      0  (#$  0  nnG  3|x!!!!'dxd<  9p`(Geneva2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X("$     d<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(&Times New Roman* ,-C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ($$   1  ..' dxdP Pd<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d00007Border 1dd* 1C << G<  9p`(Arial  !  #d#(  33   YYY FILED3XMarch22,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk   P !  #d#(   $          Rule10(CourtofAppeals).MemorandumOpinion(b)TheCourt,withconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequentunrelatedcase.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA: T Monaco  BA: T Monaco ! . &''Xd&#''Xd#(  7eXXdd7     \RA'\    //@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALS@ WESTERNSECTIONATNASHVILLE   ______________________________________ MARCUSALLEN,     DavidsonChanceryNo.941044III       TheHonorableRobertS.Brandt, PetitionerAppellant,   Chancellor       Vs.       No.01A019508CH00376       AFFIRMED * L241;+'h|`  `LCHRISTINEBRADLEY,   CharlesW.Burson,AttorneyGeneral COMMISSIONER,DEPARTMENT andReporter,PatriciaC.Kussman, OFCORRECTION,     CounselforState RespondentAppellee.   MarcusAllen,ProSe/X____________________________________________________________________________ @ MEMORANDUMOPINION 5   ___________________________________________________________________________ ӛ Thisappealinvolvesaninmate'sallegationsthathisreleaseeligibilitydatewasimproperlycalculatedbytheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection.PlaintiffAppellant,MarcusAllen("Allen"),petitionedthechancerycourtforadeclaratoryjudgmentseeking,interalia,anewcalculationofhisparoleandreleaseeligibilitydates.ThetrialcourtgrantedtheMotionforSummaryJudgmentfiledbyDefendantAppellee,ChristineBradley,Commissioner,DepartmentofCorrections("Commissioner").Allen,actingprose,perfectedthepresentappeal. OnApril8,1990,MarcusAllenwasconvictedof14countsofreceivingstolenproperty.Hereceived14fiveyearterms,sometobeservedconcurrentlyandsometobeservedconsecutively,totaling20yearsofservice.AllenwassentencedasaRangeIImultipleoffender,makinghimeligibleforparolereleaseafterserviceof35%ofthetwentyyearsentence,lesssentencecreditsearnedandretained.T.C.A.4035501(d)(Michie1990&Supp.1995).̀ OnOctober31,1991,AllenescapedfromFortPillowPrisonandFarm.HewasreturnedtotheprisononMarch3,1992,andonMarch30,1992adisciplinaryhearingwasheldand,pursuanttoTDOCPolicy#502.02,Allen'sreleaseeligibilitydatewasextendedby20%.AllenwasalsoconvictedinLauderdaleCountyoffelonyescapeandsentencedtooneyearandsixmonths. AlthoughAllenhaspresentedseveralissuesforthisCourt'sreview,weperceivethedispositiveissuetobewhetherthetrialcourterredingrantingtheCommissioner'sMotionforSummaryJudgment. Atrialcourtshouldgrantamotionforsummaryjudgmentwhenthemovantdemonstratesthattherearenogenuineissuesofmaterialfactandthatthemovingpartyisentitledtojudgmentasamatteroflaw.Tenn.R.Civ.P.56.03.Thepartymovingforsummaryjudgmentbearstheburdenofdemonstratingthatnogenuineissueofmaterialfactexists. Byrdv.Hall ,847S.W.2d208,210(Tenn.1993).In Byrd ,theCourtstated:8 8 Onceitisshownbythemovingpartythatthereisnogenuineissueofmaterialfact,thenonmovingpartymustthendemonstrate,byaffidavitsordiscoverymaterials,thatthereisagenuine,materialfactdisputetowarrantatrial. Fowlerv.HappyGoodmanFamily ,575S.W.2d496,498(Tenn.1978); Merrittv.WilsonCty.Bd.ofZoningAppeals ,656S.W.2d846,859(Tenn.Ct.App.1983).Inthisregard,Rule56.05providesthatanonmovingpartycannotsimplyrelyuponhispleadingsbutmustsetforth specificfacts showingthatthereisagenuineissueofmaterialfactfortrial."Ifhedoesnotsorespond,summaryjudgment...shallbeenteredagainsthim."Rule56.05(Emphasisinoriginal).̜ Id .at211.̜ӛ Inthecaseatbar,theCommissionerfiledaMotionforSummaryJudgmentwithaccompanyingaffidavitonJune16,1994.Theaffidavit,executedbyWilliamO.Keeling,Manager,SentenceComputationServices,TennesseeDepartmentofCorrection,statedAllen'ssentenceeffectivedates,releaseeligibilitydates,andexpirationdatesascomputedbytheTDOC. OnJuly22,1994,AllenfiledamotionandaffidavitseekinganextensionoftimeinwhichtorespondtotheCommissioner'sMotionforSummaryJudgment.Despitehisrequestforanextension,AllenneverfiledaresponsetotheCommissioner'smotion.Itiswellestablishedthatanonmovingpartycannotrelyonhispleadings,butmustrespondtoamotionforsummaryjudgment,byaffidavitorotherwise,withspecificfacts.Tenn.R.Civ.P.56.05; Byrd ,847S.W.2dat210.ThetrialcourtfoundthattheavermentsintheKeelingaffidavitdemonstrated,forthepurposeofsummaryjudgment,thattheTDOChadnotimproperlycomputedAllen'ssentence,therebyestablishingthatnogenuineissueofmaterialfactremainedinAllen'ssuitfordeclaratoryjudgment. Allenalsoassertsinhisbriefthattheextensionofhisreleaseeligibilitydateisanexpostfactolaw.HefurtherarguesthattheϜincreasepolicyisnotequallyapplied.Allensassertioniswithoutmerit.Thereisnothingintherecordthatsupportshisassertion.Moreover,thereisnoconstitutionalrightforaprisonertobereleasedpriortotheexpirationofalegallyimposedsentence. Rowlandv.Bradley ,899S.W.2d614(Tenn.Ct.App.1994). ThetrialcourtcorrectlygrantedthemotionforsummaryϜjudgment.Accordingly,theorderofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsonappealaretaxedtoappellant.ӛ       _________________________________       W.FRANKCRAWFORD,       PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S. CONCUR: _________________________________ ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGE ̛ _________________________________DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE ̜