FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 03 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KENNETH RAY HARRIS, No. 10-16017
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 4:08-cv-01530-PJH
v.
MEMORANDUM *
BEN CURRY, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Phyllis J. Hamilton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 20, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Kenneth Ray Harris appeals from the district
court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Harris contends that the Board’s 2006 decision to deny him parole was not
supported by “some evidence” and therefore violated his due process rights. The
only federal right at issue in the parole context is procedural, and the only proper
inquiry is what process the inmate received, not whether the state court decided the
case correctly. See Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S. Ct. 859, 862-63 (2011); Pearson v.
Muntz, No. 08-55728, 2011 WL 1238007, at *5 (9th Cir. Apr. 5, 2011). Because
Harris raises no procedural challenges, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
2 10-16017