Opinion ID: 696992
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Custody Classification

Text: 8 Newman contends that the district court erred by determining that even if he did have a state-created liberty interest in a proper classification, the defendants provided constitutionally adequate procedural due process. 9 California has created a liberty interest in freedom from administrative segregation. See Toussaint v. McCarthy, 801 F.2d 1080, 1097-98 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1069 (1987). An inmate may be segregated from the general prison population when prison officials reasonably believe he threatens the security of the prison. See id. at 1100-01. Prison administrators need only provide the inmate with an informal adversarial hearing within a reasonable time, advise the inmate of the reason for segregation and allow the inmate to present his views. Id. Due process does not require prison authorities to hold a hearing before the inmate is actually segregated or to disclose the identity of persons providing the information relied on. Id. Some evidence in the record is enough to support the prison official's decision to segregate an inmate. Id. at 1104. 10 In his original complaint, Newman alleged that he appeared before the ICC on December 21, 1992, and that the ICC reclassified his custody level to Close A pursuant to prison policy. These allegations establish that the defendants provided Newman with an informal hearing on December 21, 1992, and an opportunity to challenge the reclassification. See id. at 1100-01. Moreover, we note that the ICC hearing took place prior to the defendants placing Newman in Close A custody. Thus, we conclude that these allegations fail to state an arguable claim that the defendants denied Newman due process. See id. 11 Newman also alleged that no evidence supported the defendants' decision to place him in Close A custody. However, in his original complaint, Newman alleged that the defendants reclassified him because he was considered an administrative problem under policy directives. In Toussaint, we acknowledged that [w]hen deciding whether administrative segregation is needed ... the administrator relies largely on subjective factors. Id. at 1100. Thus, we conclude that the defendants determination that Newman was an administrative problem was sufficient to instigate the reclassification process. See id.