James Donald Anderson v. Carl Zenon

28 F.3d 104 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James Donald ANDERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Carl ZENON, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-35540. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 5, 1994. Decided June 24, 1994. Before: ALARCON, NORRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 The district court dismissed James Donald Anderson's (Anderson) pro se 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas corpus petition because Anderson failed to show cause and prejudice for his procedural default in state court. 1 Generally, before we reach the issue of whether a prisoner was justified in failing to petition for review, we must first make the threshold determination of whether the habeas corpus petition presents a federal constitutional claim. 3 Anderson's petition states the following three grounds for relief: 4 Parole Board erred in imposing a 36 month period of parole supervision.... At the time of crime [sic], Sept. 1985[,] the length of active…