844 F2d 793 Wilson v. Sumner
844 F.2d 793
Unpublished Disposition
No. 86-2441.
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Carl M. WILSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
George SUMNER, Defendant-Appellee.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 15, 1988.*
Decided March 30, 1988.
Before JAMES R. BROWNING, Chief Judge, and HUG and BEEZER, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Wilson brings a section 1983 challenge to his incarceration in a medium-security prison for having injured three people while driving drunk. His complaint was dismissed as frivolous. We affirm.
Wilson's contention that he has a constitutionally-protected liberty interest in minimum-security classification was rejected in Maison v. Sumner, 810 F.2d 205 (9th Cir.1987), mem. aff'g 636 F.Supp. 595 (D.Nev.1986) (holding that Nevada statutes, as authoritatively construed by the Nevada Supreme Court, make minimum-security classification a matter of prison officials' discretion).
Wilson argues he was denied equal protection because he is in a medium-security prison, whereas drunk drivers who only injure one person are classified as minimum-security prisoners. However, there is obviously a rational basis for distinguishing between multi-victim and single-victim offenders. That is all the state need show to defeat an equal protection challenge. Inglese v. United States Parole Commission, 768 F.2d 932, 940 (9th Cir.1985).
AFFIRMED.