With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". entitle him to credit against his sentence, and which is a factor affecting security level and parole decisions. Generally speaking, inmates have no legally protected interest in remaining in a particular location of confinement. Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 226-27, 96 S.Ct. 2532, 49 L.Ed.2d 451 (1976). Although plaintiff argues that the ability to take and complete classes is a protected liberty interest, he has not pointed to a state statute creating such an interest. See id.; Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 483-84, 115 S.Ct. 2293, 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995). Further, the potential effect of preventing plaintiff from taking classes on the duration of his sentence is “too attenuated to invoke the procedural guarantees of the Due Process Clause.” Sandin, 515 U .S. at 487, 115 S.Ct. 2293 (<HOLDING>). VIII Challenge of the seizure of plaintiffs

A: holding that effect of misconduct record on duration of sentence was too attenuated even though it was a relevant consideration for parole
B: holding that sentence was erroneous but not void where sentence of life imprisonment without parole was imposed for first degree murder under unconstitutional penalty statute
C: holding that a sentence was based on a mandatory statutory minimum sentence even though it was lowered under another statute
D: holding that even though the complaint was dismissed without prejudice as a sanction for misconduct and even though the order of dismissal was therefore not an adjudication on the merits the defendants were nevertheless properly considered the prevailing party for purposes of attorneys fees
A.