Juan Valdez v. Neil Adler

MEMORANDUM

Federal prisoner Juan Valdez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging his prison disciplinary proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition, see Alaimalo v. United States, 645 F.3d 1042, 1047 (9th Cir.2011), and we affirm.

Valdez contends that he was not provided with notice of the charges within 24 hours of when staff became aware of the incident. The regulations then in effect, however, only stated that the prisoner should “ordinarily” be notified within 24 hours. See 28 C.F.R. § 541.15 (a) (2010). The time frame was not mandatory. Moreover, in accordance with due process, Valdez received written notice at least 24 hours before the disciplinary hearing. See Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 564 , 94 S.Ct. 2963 , 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974).

Valdez also contends that it was a violation of due process to charge him with two offenses arising out of the same incident, in violation of Chapter 4 of Program Statement 5270.08. Valdez further contends that the Unit Disciplinary Committee (“UDC”) members were…