William B. Greene v. Stephen Sinclair

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WILLIAM B. GREENE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STEPHEN SINCLAIR,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 09-35485
D.C. No. 2:08-cv-00884-RSL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert S. Lasnik, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
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.
FILED
JUL 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-35485 2
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 (1976); see also Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891,
899 (9th Cir. 1996).
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.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --