Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

386 F. App'x 602

William Greene v. Stephen Sinclair

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided July 2, 2010

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2010-07-02

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2011

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Stone v. Powell · Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2010-07-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 MEMORANDUM …

¶2 Washington state prisoner William B. Greene appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

¶3 Greene contends that the use of DNA information that was collected after a 1995 conviction, which was vacated on federal habeas review, in a subsequent criminal prosecution, violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment. Federal habeas review is precluded where, as here, the State has provided appellant “an opportunity for full and fair litigation of a Fourth Amendment claim[.]” Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 482, 96 S.Ct. 3037, 49 L.Ed.2d 1067 (1976); see also Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 899 (9th Cir.1996).

¶4 Greene’s motion for remand, filed on September 23, 2009; his request for judicial notice, filed on November 5, 2009; and his motion for remand, filed on January 4, 2010, are denied.

¶5 AFFIRMED.

…

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

/386/fappx/602 · .json · Public domain