Kelly Koerner v. James Cox

Good Law
588 F. App'x 694
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 18, 201414-15159California458 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Kelly Koerner, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process violations in connection with prison disciplinary proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Nevada Dep’t of Corr. v. Greene, 648 F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir.2011). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for Clark regarding Koer-ner’s due process claim in connection with his disciplinary proceedings and disciplinary segregation term because, even assuming a protected liberty interest, Koerner failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Clark violated his due process rights. See Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 564-67 , 94 S.Ct. 2963 , 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974) (setting forth due process requirements before imposing sanctions implicating a prisoner’s liberty interest); Cousins v. Lockyer, 568 F.3d 1063, 1070-71 (9th Cir.2009) (failure to comply with prison regulations does not amount to a constitutional violation); Koenig v. Vannelli, 971 F.2d 422, 423 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam) (prison officials may limit an inmate’s efforts to defend himself if…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.