Unpublished Disposition, 883 F.2d 1023 (9th Cir. 1989)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 883 F.2d 1023 (9th Cir. 1989)

Leydell BAKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Kenneth O. EIKENBERRY; Chase Riveland; and Kathryn Bail,Defendants-Appellees.

No. 88-3851.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 8, 1989.* Decided Aug. 22, 1989.

Before ALDISERT,**  EUGENE A. WRIGHT and BEEZER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM*** 

Baker appeals pro se from a grant of summary judgment denying his Sec. 1983 civil rights claim. He also contests the denial of his motion to compel discovery. For the reasons given in the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, we affirm the court's grant of summary judgment.

The court did not abuse its discretion by denying Baker's discovery motion. The discovery requested could not elicit evidence that would raise genuine issues of material fact to sustain his civil rights claims. See Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 412 (9th Cir. 1988) (citing Taylor v. Sentry Life Ins. Co., 729 F.2d 652, 656 (9th Cir. 1984)).

We reject Baker's contention that the defendants have improperly refused to release him on parole. His remedy lies only in a petition for habeas corpus after he has exhausted his state remedies. Ybarra v. Reno Thunderbird Mobile Home Village, 723 F.2d 675, 681 (9th Cir. 1984).

Baker's additional claims of court bias and right to counsel are without merit. See Richards v. Harper, 864 F.2d 85, 87 (9th Cir. 1988).

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

 **

Senior Judge Ruggero J. Aldisert, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

 ***

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3