Case ID: f-appx_410/html/0053-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bobbie EDELEN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. BOARD OF PRISON TERMS, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 08-55246.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 10, 2011.
    
    Filed Jan. 19, 2011.
    Bobbie Edelen, San Luis Obispo, CA, pro se.
    Jennifer L. Dolan, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Bobbie Edelen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and we affirm.

Edelen contends that the Board of Prison Terms’s 2005 decision to deny him parole was not supported by “some evidence” and therefore violated his due process rights. The state court did not unreasonably conclude that some evidence supports the Board’s decision. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Hayward v. Marshall, 603 F.3d 546, 562-63 (9th Cir.2010).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     
      
      . We certify for appeal, on our own motion, the issue of whether the 2005 decision of the California Board of Prison Terms to deny parole violated due process. We decline to issue a certificate of appealability as to Ede-len’s remaining claims.