Case ID: f-appx_154/html/0680-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James BROOMFIELD, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Charles A. DANIELS, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.
    No. 04-35188.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 5, 2005.
    
    Decided Dec. 12, 2005.
    James Broomfield, Sheridan, OR, pro se.
    Craig J. Casey, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR, for RespondentAppellee.
    Before: GOODWIN, W. FLETCHER and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Federal prisoner James Broomfield appeals pro se the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253.

Reviewing de novo, Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999), we affirm. For the reasons stated by the district court, petitioner has not shown that due process was violated in depriving him of good time credits.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.