Case ID: f-appx_443/html/0286-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lonnie DAWSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. NORWOOD, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 10-55383.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 12, 2011.
    
    Filed July 18, 2011.
    Lonnie Dawson, Adelanto, CA, pro se.
    Jessica O. Cheh, Assistant U.S., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Federal prisoner Lonnie Dawson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm the district court.

Dawson challenges the prison disciplinary decision finding him guilty of using a telephone to further criminal activity and resulting in a 60-day loss of good time credits. Specifically, Dawson contends that his due process rights were violated during the disciplinary hearing because the incident report improperly charged him with violating Code 197 instead of Code 197A and because the discipline hearing officer’s decision is not supported by some evidence. The record reflects that Dawson received all process that was due and that some evidence supports the disciplinary findings. See Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-67, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974); see also Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455, 105 S.Ct. 2768, 86 L.Ed.2d 356 (1985).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.