United States Ninth Circuit

In a habeas petition challenging the denial of petitioner's parole, the denial of the petition is affirmed where: 1) a prisoner must obtain a certificate of appealability from administrative decisions such as denial of parole and prison transfer; 2) in the absence of state law establishing otherwise, there was no federal constitutional requirement that parole be granted in the absence of "some evidence" of future dangerousness or anything else; and 3) there was some evidence of petitioner's future dangerousness.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/24/2008
• Decided 05/04/2010
• Published 05/04/2010

Judges

• Before ALEX KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN, ANDREWJ. KLEINFELD, SIDNEY R. THOMAS, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, RAYMOND C. FISHER, RICHARD A. PAEZ, MARSHA S. BERZON, RICHARD C. TALLMAN, RICHARD R. CLIFTON, and N. RANDY SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Michael Satris (argued and briefed supplemental brief), Law Office of Michael Satris, Bolinas, CA, and Joseph V. Camarata (briefed opening brief), Vallejo, CA, for the appellant., Monica Knox, Assistant Federal Defender, Sacramento, CA, for amicus Federal Defenders for the Central and Eastern Districts of California.


• For Appellees:
  
• Jennifer A. Neill (argued and briefed supplemental brief), Supervising Deputy Attorney General, San Diego, CA, and Jane Catherine Malich (briefed), Deputy Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for the appellee.