J.D. (Gerald) Enquist v. Neal Brown Kathy Kaatz R.J. Nannie

967 F.2d 585 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. J.D. (Gerald) ENQUIST, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Neal BROWN; Kathy Kaatz; R.J. Nannie, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-35689. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 26, 1992. * Decided June 3, 1992. Before FARRIS, DAVID R. THOMPSON and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 J.D. Enquist, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the appellees in Enquist's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We review de novo, Darring v. Kincheloe, 783 F.2d 874, 876 (9th Cir.1986), and we affirm. 3 Enquist contends that he was denied due process in a prison disciplinary hearing because the prison hearing officer violated Washington state administrative regulations. This contention lacks merit. 4 In the context of prison disciplinary proceedings, the requirements of due process are satisfied if there is "some evidence" to support the findings of the…