Everett E. Osborne v. James Blodgett Ken Eikenberry Kathryn Bail George Johnson David L. Carlson

19 F.3d 28 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Everett E. OSBORNE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James BLODGETT; Ken Eikenberry; Kathryn Bail; George Johnson; David L. Carlson; et al., Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-35005. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 22, 1994. * Decided March 2, 1994. Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Everett E. Osborne, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Osborne contends that the revocation without a hearing of his early release date violated the (1) Due Process Clause, (2) Ex Post Facto Clause, and (3) Equal Protection Clause. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Secs. 1291 , 2253. We review de novo a district court's decision on a petition for writ of habeas corpus. Adams v. Peterson, 968 F.2d 835, 843 (9th Cir.1992) (en banc), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 1818 (1993). We affirm. 3 On 1…