Case Name: Justo ESCALANTE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Margarita PEREZ, Chairman California Board of Prison Terms; et al., Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-13
Citations: 399 F. App'x 288
Docket Number: No. 06-56270
Parties: Justo ESCALANTE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Margarita PEREZ, Chairman California Board of Prison Terms; et al., Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 399
Pages: 288–288

Head Matter:
Justo ESCALANTE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Margarita PEREZ, Chairman California Board of Prison Terms; et al., Respondents-Appellees.
No. 06-56270.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.
Filed Oct. 13, 2010.
Justo Escalante, Soledad, CA, pro se.
Collette C. Cavalier, Esq., Office of the Deputy Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, 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 Justo Escalante 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.
Escalante contends that the Board's 2003 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, 562-63 (9th Cir.2010) (en banc).
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 the 2003 decision of the California Board of Prison Terms ("Board") to deny parole violated due process.