Ford

MEMORANDUM **

Brian A. Ford, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants’ parole determination violated various federal and state constitutional and *591 statutory rights. 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and affirm.

Ford’s complaint, prepared by an attorney, alleges, at most, that the reports upon which defendants based their determination that Ford has a severe emotional disturbance which makes him a danger to the community were unreliable. Because prison officials need only “some evidence” when making parole determinations, we cannot conclude that the district court erred by concluding that these allegations failed to state a claim. See Jancsek v. Or. Bd. of Parole, 833 F.2d 1389, 1390 (9th Cir.1987). Insofar as Ford argues on appeal that this Court should conduct an independent review of Oregon’s parole procedures or that the inability to call and cross-examine witnesses violated his procedural due process rights, we decline to consider these contentions…