David King v. T. Pebler

362 F. App'x 872
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 22, 2010
Docket08-17527
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 362 F. App'x 872 (David King v. T. Pebler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
David King v. T. Pebler, 362 F. App'x 872 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

David King, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that a prison guard violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by directing him to cut his hair. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Sacks v. Office of Foreign Assets Control, 466 F.3d 764, 770 (9th Cir.2006). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Dittman v. California, 191 F.3d 1020, 1027 n. 3 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed King’s equal protection claim because he failed to allege facts showing that he was treated differently from other inmates who were similarly situated and that there was no rational basis for the difference in treatment. See Thornton v. City of St. Helens, 425 F.3d 1158, 1167-68 (9th Cir.2005) (stating that different treatment of unlike individuals does not support an equal protection claim).

We have carefully considered King’s remaining contentions and conclude they are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
362 F. App'x 872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-king-v-t-pebler-ca9-2010.