Case Name: Kelvin PATTERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Anthony KANE, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-06-21
Citations: 384 F. App'x 663
Docket Number: No. 07-16544
Parties: Kelvin PATTERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Anthony KANE, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 384
Pages: 663–664

Head Matter:
Kelvin PATTERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Anthony KANE, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 07-16544.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 25, 2010.
Filed June 21, 2010.
Kelvin Patterson, Soledad, CA, pro se.
Scott C. Mather, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Kelvin Patterson 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.
Patterson contends that the Board's 2004 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, 562-64, 568-69 (9th Cir.2010).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
. We certify for appeal, on our own motion, the issue of whether the 2004 decision of the California Board of Prison Terms ("the Board") to deny parole violated due process.