McGuire v.Hamlet

Good Law
171 F. App'x 583
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 16, 2006No. 04-16082California669 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*584 MEMORANDUM **

Mark McGuire, a prisoner serving a sentence in the state of California, appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . McGuire contends that he was unlawfully punished in a prison disciplinary proceeding in which he was found to have altered a computer operating system. Because his petition is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1), we consider only whether the state court’s decision is contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the United States Supreme Court. See Lockyer v. Andrade, 588 U.S. 63 , 71, 123 S.Ct. 1166 , 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003). Applying this standard, we affirm the district court’s ruling.

As a threshold matter, the State challenges our jurisdiction to decide the matter because the district court denied a certificate of appealability (COA). In this circuit, under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c), “a COA is not required when a state prisoner challenges an administrative decision regarding the execution of his sentence.” White v. Lambert, 370 F.3d 1002, 1010 (9th Cir. 2004); see…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.