Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Paul H. Nunley v. R. Michael Cody, 968 F.2d 20, 10th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit regarding a habeas corpus petition filed by Paul Nunley. The court dismissed Nunley's fourth habeas petition as an abuse of the writ. While Nunley asserted new grounds for relief, he failed to demonstrate cause for not raising these issues in his original petition. As such, the court denied Nunley's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and his application for a certificate of probable cause, dismissing his appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1992-06-26 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 968 F.2d 20 Docket: 91-6406

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit regarding a habeas corpus petition filed by Paul Nunley. The court dismissed Nunley's fourth habeas petition as an abuse of the writ. While Nunley asserted new grounds for relief, he failed to demonstrate cause for not raising these issues in his original petition. As such, the court denied Nunley's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and his application for a certificate of probable cause, dismissing his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views2 pages

    Paul H. Nunley v. R. Michael Cody, 968 F.2d 20, 10th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit regarding a habeas corpus petition filed by Paul Nunley. The court dismissed Nunley's fourth habeas petition as an abuse of the writ. While Nunley asserted new grounds for relief, he failed to demonstrate cause for not raising these issues in his original petition. As such, the court denied Nunley's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and his application for a certificate of probable cause, dismissing his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    968 F.

    2d 20
    NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored,
    unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a
    material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral
    argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of
    November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or
    further order.

    Paul H. NUNLEY, Petitioner-Appellant,


    v.
    R. Michael CODY, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 91-6406.

    United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.


    June 26, 1992.

    Before SEYMOUR, STEPHEN H. ANDERSON and BALDOCK, Circuit


    Judges.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
    SEYMOUR, Circuit Judge.

    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination
    of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The cause is
    therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

    Petitioner Paul Nunley appeals the district court's dismissal of this habeas
    corpus petition, his fourth, as an abuse of the writ. Mr. Nunley's first habeas
    petition was dismissed for failure to exhaust, rec., vol I, doc. 10 at 4; his second
    was denied, id. at Ex. A; and his third was dismissed as successive, since it
    raised the same issues as the second petition, id. at Ex. B. Mr. Nunley now
    asserts several new grounds for relief. As the district court pointed out,
    however, Mr. Nunley has not demonstrated "cause" for his failure to raise these
    issues in his original petition. Therefore, this habeas petition constitutes an
    abuse of the writ under governing Supreme Court law. See McCleskey v. Zant,

    111 S.Ct. 1454 (1991).


    3

    Mr. Nunley's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and his application for a
    certificate of probable cause are denied. The appeal is dismissed.

    This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or
    used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing
    the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th
    Cir.R. 36.3

    You might also like