CURIAM. Two days before his scheduled execution for killing a convenience store clerk' in Arkansas, Kirt Wainwright filed two civil rights lawsuits to delay his death. In the first action, Wainwright asserts his constitutional rights were violated on December 26, 1996 when the Post-Prison Transfer Board declined to recommend clemency without considering his. case on the merits because Wainwright had not yet exhausted his habeas remedies in the courts. On January 2, 1997, however, we decided against Wainwright in the habeas proceedings the Board mentioned. Wainwright v. Norris, No. 96-8168 (8th Cir. Jan. 2, 1997) (order denying motion for authorization to file second habeas 1097 (1996); Otey v. Stenberg, 34 F.3d 635, 637-39 (8th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); Otey v. Hopkins, 5 F.3d 1125, 1128-29 n. 3
holding no procedural or fundamental constitutional right creates a protected interest in standardless clemency statute absent a constitutionally protected interest clemency statute only provides a statecreated right to ask for mercy holding that under article i section 9 a person has no constitutionally protected privacy interest in abandoned property holding parental rights are constitutionally protected fundamental interest holding there is no constitutionally protected interest in how the nebraska board of pardons receives a clemency request or in having unbiased decisionmakers on the board right to consideration of clemency not violated when decisionmaker is predisposed holding right to be fundamental