Terry Campbell v. Alejandro Armentia
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Terry Campbell appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations in connection with his 2004 and 2006 parole hearings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim. Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Civish, 382 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir.2004). We may affirm for any reason supported by the record. Tanaka v. Univ. of S. Cal., 252 F.3d 1059, 1062 (9th Cir.2001). We affirm.
Federal issue preclusion law bars Campbell from bringing his claims concerning his 2004 parole hearings. Campbell seeks to relitigate issues identical to ones previously litigated and decided in his federal habeas petition; the habeas decision was final and on the merits; and Campbell, the petitioner in the habeas proceeding, is the same party against whom the defendants seek preclusion here. See Hydranautics v. FilmTec Corp., 204 F.3d 880, 885 (9th Cir.2000) (outlining requirements for collateral estoppel to apply).
The district court properly determined that the parole board’s bases for finding Campbell unsuitable for parole in 2006 were properly…