Ruben Miranda v. United States Parole Commission, Bob Roberts, Warden, Fci-Pleasanton

892 F.2d 83 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Ruben MIRANDA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Bob Roberts, Warden, FCI-Pleasanton, Respondents-Appellees. No. 89-15160. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 13, 1989. * Decided Dec. 27, 1989. Before EUGENE A. WRIGHT, HUG, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 The appellant, Ruben Miranda, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241 and 2243. Miranda claims that the United States Parole Commission incorrectly computed his sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines. 3 Miranda contends the Parole Commission double-counted in that it used his prior convictions first to determine his true guidelines, then used those prior convictions once more to recommend that his sentence exceed the recommended guidelines. He argues that using the same action to justify a recommended parole date and to justify exceeding that date…