U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2011

Worline v. Salazar

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 17, 2011 · Fletcher, Reinhardt, Wardlaw

447 F. App'x 832

Counsel

Ethan Douglas Dettmer, Esquire, Kareem Ghanem, Jason Bartholomew Stayers, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner-Appellee., Christopher Worline, pro se., Kim Aarons, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellant.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Warden J.F. Salazar appeals the district court’s grant of Christopher Worline’s petitions for a writ of habeas corpus. Wor-line argued that there was not “some evidence” supporting the California Board of Parole Hearings’s 2004 and 2005 decisions denying him parole. In light of Swarthout v. Cooke, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 859, 178 L.Ed.2d 732 (2011) (per curiam), we hold that Worline’s federal right to due process was not violated. Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s grant of his habeas petitions. We understand that the state will now grant Worline an out-of-custody parole hearing.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.