FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 7 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAMES L. SNIDER, No. 08-15805
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:07-CV-04311-MHP
v.
MEMORANDUM *
CURRY, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Marilyn H. Patel, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner James L. Snider appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging the
Board’s 2006 decision denying him parole. We dismiss.
*
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).
Snider contends that the California Penal Code § 3041 creates a federally
protected liberty interest in parole and that the Board’s failure to set a parole date
at his 2006 hearing violated his federal constitutional rights. Snider also contends
that the Board violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause.
After briefing was completed in this case, this court held that a certificate of
appealability is required to challenge the denial of parole. See Hayward
v. Marshall, 603 F.3d 546, 554-55 (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc). Because Snider has
not has made a substantial showing of the denial of a federal constitutional right,
we decline to certify his claims. See Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S. Ct. 859, 862-63
(2011) (per curiam); 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).
Snider’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied.
DISMISSED.
08-15805