William M. Smith v. Manfred F. Maass

24 F.3d 249 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William M. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Manfred F. MAASS; et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-35828. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 20, 1994. * Decided May 4, 1994. Before: POOLE, BEEZER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 William M. Smith, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of prison officials in his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. Smith alleged violations of his constitutional rights resulting from defective disciplinary hearings and his placement in segregation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We review de novo, Hopkins v. Andaya, 958 F.2d 881, 884 (9th Cir.1992), and affirm. 3 Smith contends that the district court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants. We disagree. The findings and recommendation prepared by the magistrate judge and adopted by the district court…