Holly Koliopoulos v. Paul Copenhaver

Good Law
464 F. App'x 641
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 30, 201110-17414California332 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Holly Koliopoulos appeals pro se from the judgment of the district court denying her 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We affirm in part, dismiss in part, and deny in part.

Koliopoulos contends that the Bureau of Prison’s (“BOP’s”) policy of considering inmates for pre-release to a Residential Reentiy Center (“RRC”) 17 to 19 months before their projected release dates denies inmates participating in a Residential Drug Abuse Program (“RDAP”) the opportunity to receive the full twelve-month RRC placement permitted by 18 U.S.C. § 3624 (c). We do not consider this contention because there is no federal jurisdiction over the claim, see Reeb v. Thomas, 636 F.3d 1224 (9th Cir.2011) (no habeas jurisdiction over challenges to exercise of BOP discretion under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3621-24 ); Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 , 112 S.Ct. 2130 , 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992) (no constitutional jurisdiction absent injury that is actual or imminent, not merely hypothetical), and, furthermore, we do not ordinarily consider on appeal claims not raised in an inmate’s habeas petition, see Moor v. Palmer, 603 F.3d 658, 660 (9th Cir.2010).

In her brief and in a separate request filed…

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.