Ismael Genao v. Craig Apker

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 23 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ISMAEL GENAO, No. 12-16985
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 4:11-cv-00388-FRZ
v.
MEMORANDUM *
CRAIG APKER and LOUIS W. WINN,
Jr.,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Frank R. Zapata, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 15, 2013 **
Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Ismael Genao appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging two prison disciplinary actions
that resulted in the loss of good time credits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
*
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).
§ 1291. We review the denial of a section 2241 petition de novo, see Tablada v.
Thomas, 533 F.3d 800, 805 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.
Genao contends that defendants improperly created the offense of
“tampering with a security device,” for which he was disciplined. This contention
fails because at the time Genao committed the offense, this conduct was prohibited
under 28 C.F.R. § 541.13 (2010). Moreover, the record indicates that Genao
received sufficient information about the factual basis for the charge “to enable
him to marshal the facts and prepare a defense.” Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S.
539, 564 (1974).
Genao also challenges the prison disciplinary finding that he engaged in a
sexual act. He contends that the hearing officer engaged in improper vouching and
was biased. The record reflects that the hearing officer made reasonable credibility
determinations and does not support Genao’s claim of bias. Genao received all
process that was due. See id. at 563-71.
AFFIRMED.
2 12-16985