Case Name: Jimmy G. MEJIA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Les BLANKS, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-21
Citations: 388 F. App'x 731
Docket Number: No. 06-56449
Parties: Jimmy G. MEJIA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Les BLANKS, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 388
Pages: 731–731

Head Matter:
Jimmy G. MEJIA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Les BLANKS, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 06-56449.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 29, 2010.
Filed July 21, 2010.
Jimmy G. Mejia, Soledad, CA, pro se. Lora Fox Martin, Esq., AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, 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 Jimmy G. Mejia 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.
Mejia contends that the Board's 2002 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, 563 (9th Cir.2010) (en banc).
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 2002 decision of the California Board of Prison Terms ("the Board") to deny parole violated due process.