Doward Ally v. Kathy Mendoza-Powers

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DOWARD ALLY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 09-15404
D.C. No. 1:06-cv-00414-AWI
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Anthony W. Ishii, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges
FILED
JAN 19 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

We certify for appeal, on our own motion, the issue of whether the1
2004 decision of the California Board of Prison Terms to deny parole violated due
process. We decline to issue a certificate of appealability as to Ally’s remaining
claims.
09-15404 2
California state prisoner Doward Ally 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.1
Ally contends that the Board of Prison Terms’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, 562-63 (9th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --