Case Name: Jackie OSBY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.F. SALAZAR, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-11
Citations: 426 F. App'x 543
Docket Number: No. 08-55913
Parties: Jackie OSBY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.F. SALAZAR, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 426
Pages: 543–543

Head Matter:
Jackie OSBY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.F. SALAZAR, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 08-55913.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 5, 2011.
Filed April 11, 2011.
Jackie Osby, Soledad, CA, pro se.
Kim Aarons, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, 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
Jackie Osby 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.
Osby contends that his right to due process was violated because he was denied parole in violation of the terms of his plea agreement. The record belies Osby's claim that the state offered a determinate 19-year sentence. Further, the state court's rejection of this claim was neither contrary to, nor involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); cf. Brown v. Poole, 337 F.3d 1155, 1159-60 (9th Cir.2003).
Osby's motion for appointment of counsel is denied.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
We certify for appeal, on our own motion, the issue of whether Osby was entitled to a 19-year determinate sentence. We decline to certify the additional arguments. See 9th Cir. R. 22-1 (e); see also Hiivalav. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam).