N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
ISAIAH NOEL W ILLIAM S, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt,
v. DEB R A W ILLIAM S, De fe nda

nt - Appe lle e . No. 13-17284 D.C . No. 4:07-c v-04464-C W
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia C la udia W ilke n, Se nior Distric t Judge , Pre siding Argue d an d Subm i tte d De c e m be r 8, 2015 San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : O’ SC A

NNLAIN, SILVER

M AN, a nd B EA, C irc uit Judge s. Appe lla nt Isa ia h W illia m s a rgue s tha t the distric t c ourt e rre d in gra nting
sum m ary judgm e nt in fa

vor of the de fe nda

nt on his due

proc e ss c la im , a

nd tha t the distric t c o urt a

buse d its disc re tion by

a dm itting e v ide nc e during tria l re ga rding his
a lle ge d m e m

be rship in a

prison ga ng a nd one of his ta

ttoos. W e a ffirm
. 

# FIL ED

FEB 02 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.Appe lla nt W i llia m s is a n inm ate in sta

te prison. He a lle ge s a

due proc e ss viola tion ba se d on W

olff v . Mc Donne ll , 418 U.S. 539 (1974). W olff a c c orde d prisone rs c e rta i n lim ite d

due proc e ss rights in prison disc i plina ry proc e e dings “ to insure tha t [a ] sta te -c re ate d right is not a

rbitra rily a brogate d.” Id. at 557. TheC ourt
a pplie d the “ m i nim

um re quire m e nts of proc e dura l due proc e ss” be c a use “ t he de te rm i nation of whe the r [prisone r m isc o nduc t] ha s oc c urre d be c om e s c ritic a l” whe n a sta te de duc ts good time c re dits a s punishm e nt. Id. at 558. Unlike W olff , the sole pla intiff in this c a s e a dm itte d c om m ission of mi sc onduc t by sta rting a prison fight. This fight wa s the subje c t of the c ha lle nge d disc iplina ry he aring. Appe lla

nt doe s not c la im

tha t his rights ha

ve be e n “ a rbitra rily a brogate d” or e xpla in how he
wa s pre judic e d by

not a tte nding thehe aring. Thus, wede c line to re m and his c a se to the distric t

c o urt for a

tria l on his due

proc e ss c la im
. Appe lla nt a lso a rgue s tha t the tria l c ourt e rre d whe n it a dm itte d into
e vide nc e the nam e of a

white supre m a c ist prison ga ng to whic h he a l le ge dly be longs, a

nd whe n i t a dm itte d i nto e v ide nc e te stim ony re ga rding one of his ta

ttoos. If a distric t c ourt a

buse s its disc re tion by

a dm i tting e v ide nc e im

prope rly , this
c ourt m ust de te rm i ne whe t

he r or not thee rror wa s ha rm le ss. Unite d State

s v . Ramire z-Roble s , 386 F.3d 1234, 1244 (9th C ir. 2004). An e rror is ha rm le ss if it is

“ m ore proba

ble tha n not tha t the e rrone ous a d

m ission of the e vide nc e did not a ffe c t 2the j ury ’ s ve rdic t.” Id. (quoting Unite d State s v . Vizc arra-Martine

z , 66 F.3d 1006, 1017 (9th C ir. 1995)). This c ourt will not reve rse a jury ve rdic t a bse nt a showing of pre j udic e . Monoty

peC orp. PLC v . Int’l Ty

pe fac e C orp. , 43 F.3d 443, 448 (9th C ir. 1994) (c iting Lare

z v . C ity of Los Ange le

s , 946 F.2d 630, 638 (9th C ir. 1991)). The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in a dm itting te stim ony a bout the g ang na

m e an d the tattoo. B ut e ve n a ssum ing tha t the se rulings we re e rrone ous, it is m ore proba

ble tha n not tha t the sa m e jury ve rdic t would ha

ve obta ine d. Abse nt the c ha lle nge d e vide nc e , the jury still would ha

ve he a rd tha t Pla intiff wa s va lida

te d
a s a m e m be r of a prison ga ng, a nd tha t he pic ke d

a fight with a

riva l ga ng m e m be r. To the e x te nt tha

t the jury wa s swa y e d by re fe re nc e to the nam e of the ga ng a nd Pla i ntiff’ s ta

ttoo, it would like ly

still beswa

y e d in the sam e m anne r by the
e vide nc e tha

t Pla intiff be longe d to a

n a ppa re ntly viole nt prison ga

ng. Thus, Pla i ntiff is not entitle d to a ne w tria l. AFFIRM E D.

3