Michael Delano Howard v. Department of Corrections, and R.E. Miller, Sgt. 190

Good Law
978 F.2d 715·1992 WL 295194·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 34380
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 16, 199291-16867California765 words

Opinion

Opinion

978 F.2d 715 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Michael Delano HOWARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant, and R.E. Miller, Sgt. # 190, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-16867. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 13, 1992. * Decided Oct. 16, 1992. Before BEEZER, CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Michael Delano Howard, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Howard alleged that defendants denied him due process at his prison disciplinary hearing by relying on evidence of positive drug test results which were not confirmed by a different test method, and by denying his request to call as a witness the officer who performed the urinalysis. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 3 We review de novo the district court's dismissal under…

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.