Ronald Green v. J. Thomas

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 16 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RONALD P. GREEN, No. 12-35013 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-01009-JE v. MEMORANDUM * J. E. THOMAS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael W. Mosman, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 9, 2012 ** Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Federal prisoner Ronald P. Green appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. * 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). Green contends that he is actually innocent of being a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 and therefore he should be allowed to proceed with his section 2241 petition under the “escape hatch” of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). This contention is foreclosed. See Marrero v. Ives, 682 F.3d 1190, 1195 (9th Cir. 2012) (“[T]he purely legal argument that a petitioner was wrongly classified as a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines is not cognizable as a claim of actual innocence under the escape hatch.”). The district court correctly dismissed his petition. See id. We construe Green’s additional arguments as a motion to expand the certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 22- 1(e); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per curiam). AFFIRMED. 2 12-35013