Fassler

MEMORANDUM **

Lawrence Fassler (“Fassler”) appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging the U.S. Parole Commission’s (“Commission”) revocation of his parole. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. We review de novo the district court’s denial of Fassler’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. McLean v. Crabtree, 173 F.3d 1176, 1180 (9th Cir.1999); Bono v. Benov, 197 F.3d 409, 411 (9th Cir.1999) (reviewing the district court’s findings of fact for clear error). Our review of the Commission’s decision to revoke Fassler’s parole, however, is very narrow; we consider only whether the Commission exceeded its statutory authority or violated the constitution. Wallace v. Christensen, 802 F.2d 1539, 1551-52 (9th Cir.1986). We affirm in part and reverse in part and remand to the Commission for a redetermination of the penalty to be imposed in light of our reversal. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we do not recount it here.

I. Procedural Due Process

Fassler argues that his due process rights were violated because the Commission delayed in holding a parole revocation…