Kevin David Robinson v. Tom L. Carey;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
KEVIN DAVID ROBINSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
TOM L. CAREY; et al.,
Respondents - Appellees.
No. 07-16226
D.C. No. CV-03-02180-GEB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Garland E. Burrell, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Kevin David Robinson appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have
FILED
APR 20 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-16226 2
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Robinson contends that the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) unlawfully converted his sentence of sixteen-years-to-
life into life without possibility of parole, in violation of his constitutional rights.
Assuming, without deciding, that Robinson has raised a cognizable due process
claim, the state court’s decision rejecting this claim was neither contrary to, nor
involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor was
based upon an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence
presented in state court proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Estelle v.
McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67-68 (1991). Robinson’s contention that the CDCR failed
to award applicable sentencing credits is belied by the record.
Robinson’s request for appointment of counsel is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --