Christopher Alan Cross v. Carl Zenon

17 F.3d 394 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Christopher Alan CROSS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Carl ZENON, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-35323. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 20, 1993. * Decided Jan. 7, 1994. Before: SNEED, NOONAN, and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Christopher Alan Cross, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 . We review de novo, Hendricks v. Zenon, 993 F.2d 664, 668 (9th Cir.1993) and affirm. 3 Cross contends that the Oregon Board of Parole violated his fourteenth amendment right to due process when it affirmed his minimum sentence by relying on false information. This contention lacks merit. 4 A prisoner has no constitutional right to be conditionally released before the expiration of a valid sentence. Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, 442 U.S. 1, 7…