Kevin Mark Greene v. Ernest C. Roe, Warden Attorney General, State of California

Good Law
103 F.3d 138·1996 WL 671996·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 36071
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 7, 199696-55283California420 words

Opinion

Opinion

103 F.3d 138 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Kevin Mark GREENE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ernest C. ROE, Warden; Attorney General, State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 96-55283. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 5, 1996. * Decided Nov. 7, 1996. Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Kevin Mark Greene, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. He contends the district court erred when it (1) dismissed his section 2254 petition with prejudice and (2) refused to permit him to file a petition against the Federal Bureau of Prisons. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo. Duckett v. Godinez, 67 F.3d 734, 739 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 1549 (1996). We vacate and remand. 3 In his section 2254 petition, Greene alleges that the state sentencing judge assured him that his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.