Lionel M. Miller v. Oregon State Prison

73 F.3d 369 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Lionel M. MILLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. OREGON STATE PRISON, Respondent-Appellee. No. 95-35073. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 17, 1995. Decided Dec. 20, 1995. Before: BROWNING, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * I. 2 The state waived its procedural default argument by failing to present it to the district court. See Granberry v. Greer, 481 U.S. 129, 134-35 (1987); Grooms v. Keeney, 826 F.2d 883, 885 (9th Cir.1987). II. 3 Assuming Miller had a liberty interest in parole, see Jancsek v. Oregon Bd. of Parole, 833 F.2d 1389, 1389-90 (9th Cir.1987), we conclude that he received all the process he was due. 4 Miller received advance notice of his parole hearing, participated in it, and was advised of the parole board's reasons for its decision. Although Miller did not have appointed counsel or access to an independent psychological examination, which due…