John Barrington v. Michael Babcock

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 25 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOHN E. BARRINGTON, No. 13-15559
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00379-JKS
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MICHAEL BABCOCK, Warden, Federal
Correctional Institute; BUREAU OF
PRISONS,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
James K. Singleton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 18, 2014**
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner John E. Barrington appeals pro se from the district court’s
judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s denial of a section
*
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).
2241 habeas petition, see Tablada v. Thomas, 533 F.3d 800, 805 (9th Cir. 2008),
and we affirm.
Barrington contends that his disciplinary proceedings, which resulted in the
loss of 27 days of good conduct time, violated his due process rights because an
investigating officer participated in his hearing and thereby deprived Barrington of
an impartial decisionmaker. Even if this claim has been properly exhausted, it is
without merit. The record reflects that Barrington’s disciplinary hearing
comported with due process, and that “some evidence” supports the disciplinary
officer’s findings. See Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-71 (1974) (setting
forth due process requirements for prison disciplinary proceedings);
Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455 (1985) (requirements of due process are
satisfied if “some evidence” supports disciplinary decision).
Barrington’s motion for leave to file a supplemental brief, filed January 10,
2014, is granted. The Clerk shall file the supplemental brief received on December
27, 2013.
AFFIRMED.
2 13-15559