T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T H A RO LD H A RV EY H A W K S, P e titio n e r- A p p e lla n t, v. AN THON Y K AN E; ARNO LD S C H W A R Z E N E G G E R , G ov erno r; BO A RD O F PRI SO N TERM S, R esp o n d en t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 06- 17383 D . C. N o . CV - 0 5 - 0 2 8 5 3 - J SW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia J e f f r e yS . W hi t e , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d A ugus t2, 2011 ** B efo re: R Y M E R , IK U T A , an dN . R . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C a l i f orni as t a t e pr i s one rH a r ol d H a rve yH a w ks appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e ntde ny i ng hi s 28 U . S . C . § 2254 habe a s pe t i t i on. W e ha ve j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. § 2 2 5 3 , a n dw e a f f i rm. 

# FI LED AU G 05 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS06- 17383 2 H a w k s c o n te n d s th a t th e B o a r do f P r is o n T e rm s ’ 2 0 0 3 d e c is io n to d e n yh im pa r ol e w a s nots upport e d by“ s om e e vi de nc e ” a nd the r e f or e vi ol a t e d hi s due p r o c e s s r ig h ts . T h e o n lyf e d e r a l r ig h t a t is s u e in th e p a r o le c o n te x t is p r o c e du r a l, a nd the onl ypr ope ri nqui ryi s w ha tpr oc e s s the i nm a t e r e c e i ve d, notw he the rthe s ta te c o u rt d e c id e dth e c a s e c o rr e c tly . See Sw artho utv. C oo ke , 131 S . C t . 859, 863 ( 2011) ( pe rc ur i a m ) . H a w ks r a i s e s no pr oc e dur a l c ha l l e nge s , s o hi s c l a i m i s not c o g n iz ab le . H a w ks c ont e nds tha tthe pa r ol e r e gul a t i on s e tf orth i n s e c t i on 2402( c ) ( 1) of th e C alifo rn ia C o d e o f R eg u lati o n s is u n co n stitu ti o n ally v ag u e. T h e s tate co u rt’s re j ec t i on of thi s c l ai m w as nei ther c on traryt o, no r an u nrea sonabl e app l i ca t i on of, c l e a r l ye s t abl i s he d f

e de r a l l a w be c aus e the r e gul a t i on i s not“ t oo va gue t o pr ovi de any gui dance. ” A rave v. Cre ec h , 5 0 7 U .S . 4 6 3 , 4 7 1 ( 1 9 9 3 ) ; see a l so H es s v . B d. of P ar ole and P os t- P r is on Supe rv is i on , 514 F . 3d 909, 913 ( 9th C i r . 2008) ( “ T he D ue P ro cess C l au se d o es n o treq u i re th e sam e p reci si o n i n th e d raft i n g o f p aro l e rel ease s ta tu te s a s is r e q u ir e din th e d r a f tin g o f p e n a l la w s .” ) . H a w k s a ls o c o n te n d s th a t th e B o a r d ’s d e n ia l o f p a r o le v io la te dh is r ig h ts un der App re nd iv. N

ew Je rs ey , 53 0 U . S . 46 6 (20 00 ), or B lake l yv . W as hi ngton , 542 U . S . 296 ( 2004) . T he s t a t e c ourt ’ s r e j e c t i on of

thi s c l a i m w a s ne i the rc ontr a ryt o, n o r an u n reaso n ab l e ap p l i cat i o n o f, fed eral l aw b ecau se th e B o ardd i dn o ti n crease06- 17383 3 H a w k s ’ s e n t e n c e b e y o n dth e s t a tu t o ryma x i mu m o f l i f e i mp r i s o n me n tf

o rh i s c r i me o f s e c o n dd e g r e e m u r d e r . H a w ks ’ s m ot i on f

orj udi c i a l not i c e i s de ni e d. AF F I RME D.