Etcheverry

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Joseph John Etcheverry appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

As a threshold matter, we reject as foreclosed the government’s contention that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because a certificate of appealability (“COA”) is required. As the district court *279 correctly determined, a COA is not necessary where, as here, a state prisoner challenges an administrative decision regarding the execution of his sentence. White v. Lambert, 370 F.3d 1002, 1010 (9th Cir.2004).

Etcheverry contends that he has a protected liberty interest in the accrual of credits based on his participation in the Inmate Work Training Incentive Program, and that his equal protection and due process rights have been violated by the statutorily-mandated 15-percent cap on work credits he may earn towards his sentence pursuant to California Penal Code § 2933.1(a). On review of the record, we conclude that the decision of the state courts in this case was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established United States Supreme…