Ralbovsky
Ralbovsky v. Kramer
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
California state prisoner Timothy Peter Ralbovsky petitioned pro se for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 , as limited by 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , alleging that *710 his equal protection rights were violated because he is not earning credits against his sentence when these credits are available to inmates who participate in California’s work conservation camps under CaLPenal Code § 2933.3. The district court denied his petition and declined to issue a certificate of appealability (COA). We affirm the district court’s denial of Ralbovsky’s petition.
As a threshold matter, the state challenges our jurisdiction because the district court denied a 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 also Rosas v. Nielsen, 428 F.3d 1229, 1232 (9th Cir.2005). Because the target of Ralbovsky’s habeas petition is an administrative decision denying him eligibility for work credits against his sentence, and not a state court proceeding, no COA is necessary. See Rosas, 428 F.3d at 1232 .