Jairo Mier-Cardenas v. Neil Adler ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 04 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAIRO FERNANDO MIER-CARDENAS, No. 09-16836
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00209-LJO
v.
MEMORANDUM *
NEIL H. ADLER, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010 **
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Jairo Fernando Mier-Cardenas 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. § 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).
Mier-Cardenas challenges a disciplinary decision in which he was found
guilty of possession, manufacture, or introduction of a hazardous tool. He
contends that he did not receive adequate notice of the charges. This contention
fails because Mier-Cardenas was provided with enough information about the
factual basis for the charge “to enable him to marshal the facts and prepare a
defense.” Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 564 (1974).
Mier-Cardenas also contends that the hearing officer’s decision was not
supported by the evidence. “Some evidence” supports the prison disciplinary
decision. Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 454 (1985).
AFFIRMED.
2 09-16836