Lizarraqa

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIE PAUL VIGIL, Jr., No. 20-cv-01340 JAM GGH P Petitioner, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS JOE A LIZARRAGA, Respondent. 16 17 Introduction and Summary Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c). Petitioner, serving an indeterminate life sentence, attacks several aspects of his denial of parole suitability. The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear, however, that federal courts are not to become involved in such determinations except for denials of the most basic forms of due process. Petitioner received the minimal due process afforded by the U.S. Supreme Court. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss based on the non-cognizability of petitioner’s claim. The undersigned agrees. Accordingly, this petition should be dismissed…