From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gomez v. Cate

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Nov 28, 2011
459 F. App'x 665 (9th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-55860 D.C. No. 2:09-cv-07701-DMG

11-28-2011

GUSTAVO GOMEZ, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MATTHEW CATE, Secretary, Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Respondent - Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Dolly M. Gee, District Judge, Presiding

Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Gustavo Gomez appeals from the district court's judgment denying and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. See Washington v. Lampert, 422 F.3d 864, 869 (9th Cir. 2005).

Gomez contends that the Board of Prison Terms's 2007 decision finding him unsuitable for parole is not supported by some evidence. Even assuming that his petition is timely, Gomez is not entitled to relief because the record reflects that Gomez received all process that was due. See Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S. Ct. 859, 862-63 (2011) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Gomez v. Cate

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Nov 28, 2011
459 F. App'x 665 (9th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Gomez v. Cate

Case Details

Full title:GUSTAVO GOMEZ, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MATTHEW CATE, Secretary, Dept…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Nov 28, 2011

Citations

459 F. App'x 665 (9th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

McDonald v. Holland

The Court assumes arguendo the timeliness of the claims asserted in the Petition. See Van Buskirk v. Baldwin,…