Free Order of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. F I L E D
JUL 25 2006
ROY JUNIOR MARKS, No. 05-16591 CATHY A. cmsasuu. cram:
us. counr or Appears
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. CV-03-02589-PI-DC-EHC
District of Arizona,
v. Phoenix
DORA B. SCHRIRO, Director; et ai.,
ORDER .
Respondents - Appellees.
Before: HAWKINS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. A
The request for a certificate of appealability is denied as unnecessary with
. respect to appellant’s contentions that he was denied the right to good time credit
and a parole eligibility date in violation of the ex post facto clause and that he is
being held unlawfully in administrative segregation. See White v. Lambert, 370
F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied 543 U.S. 991 (2005) (holding that a I
certificate of appealability "is not required when a state prisoner challenges an
administrative decision regarding the execution of his sentence").
The request for a certificate of appealability is denied as to the remaining
claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
Appellant’s motion for in forma pauperis status is granted. The Clerk shall
change the docket to reflect appellant’s in forma pauperis status.
Case 2:O3—cv—O2589-EHC Document 89 Filed O8/O1/2006 Page 1 of2

. The opening brief is due October 10, 2006; the answering brief is due
November 9, 2006; the optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of
the answering brief
Because appellant is a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis and is not
represented by counsel, appellant is not required to file excerpts of record. See 9th
Cir. R. 24-1.
Because there were no hearings in the district court, the clerk of thatcourt
shall forward the certificate of record immediately. See 9th Cir. R. 1 l-2.
_ 2
Case 2:O3—cv—O2589-EHC Document 89 Filed O8/O1/2006 Page 2 of 2 l

Case 2:03-cv-02589-EHC

Document 89

Filed 08/01/2006

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:03-cv-02589-EHC

Document 89

Filed 08/01/2006

Page 2 of 2