Brooks

Brooks v. Poulos

Good Law
370 F. App'x 826
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 10, 201007-56452California318 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Sandy Brooks appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas petition. On appeal, Brooks argues that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (“CDCR”) calculation of his earliest possible release date (“EPRD”) violated both his federal due process rights and the federal Ex Post Facto clause.

As to his due process claim, Brooks argued to the California state courts that his liberty interests were violated because the CDCR did not properly calculate his EPRD. We deny Brooks’s habeas petition on this ground, because the determination of a formula for caleulat- ing the restoration of good time credits is an unreviewable issue of state law, and the state court’s finding that the calculation of good time credits was correct was not “an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(2). Moreover, this record does not demonstrate, and Brooks’s counsel presented no evidence, that Brooks ever presented a due process claim to the state courts based on any alleged lack of an appropriate hearing, such that the California courts were given an “ ‘opportunity to pass upon and…

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.