David Edwards v. Gary Swarthout

Good Law
597 F. App'x 914
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 24, 201414-15133California716 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

David Edwards filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he contended that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) incorrectly applied the credit limitation of California Penal Code § 2933.1 to his sentence, in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. The district court summarily dismissed Edwards’ claim under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (“Habeas Rules”), concluding that, because California had not created a liberty interest in earning credits under § 2933, the CDCR’s denial of the ability to earn credits was not a deprivation of due process. In the same order, the district court granted -a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on the question of whether Edwards had a liberty interest in the accrual of good time credits earned through § 2933. Because, as we briefly explain below, this was not an appropriate case for summary dismissal under Rule 4, we vacate the district court’s order of dismissal and remand for further proceedings.

Section 2933 was enacted in 1982, and provided that prisoners would earn “work-time” credits for working in a…

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.