Thesolonia Baker v. Charles D. Marshall H.A. Ripptoe

21 F.3d 1111 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Thesolonia BAKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles D. MARSHALL; H.A. Ripptoe, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-15698. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 20, 1994. * Decided April 25, 1994. Before: POOLE, BEEZER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Thesolonia Baker, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of the defendants in his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. Baker contends that his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection were violated by placement in administrative segregation at the Pelican Bay State Prison on the ground that he is affiliated with a prison gang. We review de novo the district court's grant of summary judgment. Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1044 (9th Cir.1989). We affirm. 3 A grant of summary judgment should be affirmed only if the evidence, read in the light most favorable to the nonmoving…