WILLIE EDWARDS V. BEN CURRY, No. 09-16589 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 19 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT WILLIE EDWARDS, No. 09-16589 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 4:08-cv-01923-CAW v. MEMORANDUM * BEN CURRY, Warden; Board of Parole Hearings; ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Claudia A. Wilken, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 17, 2012 ** Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Willie Edwards 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). Edwards contends that the Board of Prison Hearings s 2005 decision finding him unsuitable for parole is not supported by some evidence and was otherwise improper. The only 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) (per curiam). Because Edwards raises no procedural challenges, we affirm. Edwards s motion to set oral argument and/or for decision is denied as moot. AFFIRMED. 2 09-16589

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.