Leroy R. Dehaven v. JAMES E. TILTON, Secretary

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
LEROY R. DEHAVEN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
JAMES E. TILTON, Secretary,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 07-56290
D.C. No. CV-06-00602-BEN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner LeRoy R. DeHaven appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have
FILED
OCT 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

We certify on our own motion the issue of whether the California Board of1
Prison Terms’ (“Board”) 2004 decision to deny DeHaven parole was supported by
some evidence. We decline to issue a certificate of appealability as to DeHaven’s
remaining claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
07-56290 2
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.1
DeHaven challenges the Board’s 2004 decision to deny him parole. 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, 569 (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --