Rubio v. Harrison

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 26 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARIO RENE RUBIO, No. 07-55110

Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. CV-04-03710-MLR

v. MEMORANDUM * C. M. HARRISON, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 11, 2010 **

Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Mario Rene Rubio appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have

jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

* 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).

EG/Research Rubio contends that his prison disciplinary proceedings violated his due

process rights because there was insufficient evidence to support the hearing

officer’s finding that Rubio engaged in mutual combat. This contention fails

because “some evidence” in the record supports the finding. See Superintendent v.

Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455 (1985).

AFFIRMED.

EG/Research 2 07-55110