Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 16 views

    Filed: Patrick Fisher

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is an order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denying Terrance Remale Thompson's request for a Certificate of Appealability (COA) to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The order summarizes that Thompson asserted seven claims of error related to his criminal trial, and that the district court denied relief on six claims and found one claim procedurally barred. The Tenth Circuit concludes that for substantially the same reasons as the district court, Thompson has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, so it denies his request for a COA.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Filed: Patrick Fisher

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    16 views3 pages
    The document is an order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denying Terrance Remale Thompson's request for a Certificate of Appealability (COA) to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The order summarizes that Thompson asserted seven claims of error related to his criminal trial, and that the district court denied relief on six claims and found one claim procedurally barred. The Tenth Circuit concludes that for substantially the same reasons as the district court, Thompson has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, so it denies his request for a COA.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-04-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 00-5186

    Original Title

    Thompson v. Boone, 10th Cir. (2001)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document is an order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denying Terrance Remale Thompson's request for a Certificate of Appealability (COA) to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The order summarizes that Thompson asserted seven claims of error related to his criminal trial, and that the district court denied relief on six claims and found one claim procedurally barred. The Tenth Circuit concludes that for substantially the same reasons as the district court, Thompson has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, so it denies his request for a COA.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    16 views3 pages

    Filed: Patrick Fisher

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is an order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denying Terrance Remale Thompson's request for a Certificate of Appealability (COA) to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The order summarizes that Thompson asserted seven claims of error related to his criminal trial, and that the district court denied relief on six claims and found one claim procedurally barred. The Tenth Circuit concludes that for substantially the same reasons as the district court, Thompson has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, so it denies his request for a COA.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 3

    F I L E D

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

    United States Court of Appeals


    Tenth Circuit

    APR 24 2001

    PATRICK FISHER
    Clerk

    TERRANCE REMALE THOMPSON,


    Petitioner-Appellant,
    No. 00-5186
    (D.C. No. 97-CV-216-K)
    (N.D. Okla.)

    v.
    BOBBY BOONE,
    Respondent-Appellee.

    ORDER AND JUDGMENT

    Before EBEL , ANDERSON , and KELLY , Circuit Judges.

    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)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is

    therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.


    Petitioner Terrance Remale Thompson appeals from the district courts
    denial of his pro se habeas petition, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. Under

    This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
    doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
    generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
    and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

    the provisions of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, petitioner
    must obtain a certificate of appealability (COA) before his appeal can proceed
    before this court.

    See Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 478 (2000); 28 U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1)(A). Because the district court denied petitioners motion for


    a COA, petitioner must demonstrate a substantial showing of the denial of
    a constitutional right before a COA can issue. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). To meet
    this standard, petitioner must show that reasonable jurists would find the district
    courts assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.

    Slack ,

    529 U.S. at 483-84.


    In his habeas application, petitioner asserted seven claims of error in
    connection with his criminal trial.

    The district court dealt with six of the issues

    on the merits, including petitioners claims of ineffective assistance of trial and


    appellate counsel. The district court ruled that one issue--alleged trial court error
    in instructing the jury on the presumption of innocence and the states burden of
    proof--was procedurally barred, as did the state court on appeal from petitioners
    post-conviction application. On appeal, petitioner contends that the states
    procedural default was in error, based on state law, and challenges the states
    post-conviction procedures in general. He also reargues the merits of five of

    Petitioner was convicted of first degree murder following the shooting


    death of Craig Foster in November of 1991.

    -2-

    the remaining claims, without reference to the district courts decision.

    These

    claims include the following alleged trial court errors: 1) admitting evidence of
    other crimes in connection with petitioner; 2) allowing witness testimony
    regarding the nature of street crimes in 1991 compared to twenty years ago;
    3) violating the trial courts own sequestration rule as to witnesses; 4) failing to
    declare a mistrial in light of allegedly improper statements made by the
    prosecutor; and petitioner further asserts 5) ineffective assistance of both trial
    and appellate counsel.
    Our review of petitioners appellate arguments, along with the record on
    appeal, including the trial transcript and decisions of the state appellate court and
    the district court, in light of the applicable law, convinces us that, for
    substantially the same reasons stated by the district court in its decision denying
    habeas relief, petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of
    a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). Petitioners request for a COA
    is DENIED and this appeal is DISMISSED.
    Entered for the Court
    Paul J. Kelly, Jr.
    Circuit Judge

    Petitioner makes no argument on one issue presented to the district court:


    cumulative error resulting in a violation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights.

    -3-

    You might also like