from the District Court of Laramie County The Honorable
Steven K. Sharpe, Judge
Representing Appellant: Chester L. Bird, pro se.
Representing Appellees: Peter K. Michael, Wyoming Attorney
General; David L. Delicath, Deputy Attorney General; James M.
Causey, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Joshua C. Eames,
Assistant Attorney General.
BURKE, C.J., and HILL, DAVIS, FOX, and KAUTZ, JJ.
Chester L. Bird is serving a sentence of life according to
law for crimes he committed in the 1990s. Mr. Bird filed a
pro se complaint pursuant to the Declaratory
Judgment Act, alleging various constitutional violations. The
district court dismissed Mr. Bird's claims, and he
appealed. We affirm.
Mr. Bird presents a number of issues for our review. Although
the issues presented are not discretely listed, Mr. Bird
discusses and presents argument on each issue listed below.
While we will not frame the issues for the parties, we do
make some allowances for pro se litigants.
Kelley v. Watson, 2003 WY 127, ¶ 4, 77 P.3d
691, 692 (Wyo. 2003).
Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-16-205(a)(i) violate Mr. Bird's
equal protection rights by treating similarly situated
prisoners differently without a rational relationship to a
legitimate state interest?
the Wyoming Department of Corrections' good time policy
violate Mr. Bird's equal protection rights by treating
similarly situated prisoners differently?
the enactment of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-16-205(a)(i)
impliedly repeal Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-13-402(a)?
the Wyoming Board of Parole violate the doctrine of
separation of powers by enacting policies governing the
commutation application procedure?
the Wyoming Board of Parole violate Mr. Bird's due
process rights by amending the commutation application
the Wyoming Board of Parole's amendment to the
commutation application procedure violate Mr. Bird's
constitutional protection against ex post facto
In the mid-90s, Mr. Bird was sentenced to two life sentences
according to law, to run concurrently. Bird v.
State, 901 P.2d 1123, 1128 (Wyo. 1995). On September 1,
2015, Mr. Bird filed a complaint against the Wyoming Board of
Parole (WBOP) and the Wyoming Department of Corrections
(WDOC) pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act. Mr. Bird
made a number of allegations, as set forth in the Issues
section above. In response to Mr. Bird's complaint, the
defendants filed a combined motion to dismiss, arguing that
Mr. Bird failed to state a claim for relief. The district
court granted the motion, and Mr. Bird timely filed his
notice of appeal.
We sustain the dismissal of a complaint pursuant to W.R.C.P.
12(b)(6) "only if it shows on its face that the
plaintiff [is] not entitled to relief under any set of
facts." Hochalter v. City of Gillette, 2005 WY
125, ¶ 9, 120 P.3d 674, 677 (Wyo. 2005) (quoting
Darrar v. Bourke, 910 P.2d 572, 575 (Wyo. 1996)).
The facts alleged in the complaint are deemed admitted and
the allegations are viewed in the light most ...