James Arthur Taylor, Petitioner-appellant, v. Thomas Cooper; Gale A. Norton, Colorado Attorney General,respondent-appellee, 978 F.2d 1268 (10th Cir. 1992)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit - 978 F.2d 1268 (10th Cir. 1992) Oct. 21, 1992

Before SEYMOUR, STEPHEN H. ANDERSON and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.* 


BALDOCK, Circuit Judge.

Petitioner appeals the denial of his pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The district court granted Petitioner leave to proceed in forma pauperis, id. § 1915(d), but denied Petitioner's request for a certificate of probable cause. Id. § 2253. The present petition raises three claims for relief which are identical to the three claims in an earlier § 2254 petition filed by Petitioner. In the earlier petition, we affirmed the district court's dismissal based on Petitioner's failure to exhaust state remedies relating to two of the claims. Taylor v. Hess, 931 F.2d 900 (10th Cir. 1991) (unpublished order and judgment). Since the dismissal of his earlier petition, Petitioner has not made any attempt to further exhaust his state remedies. Rather, he filed the present petition and attached his briefs filed on direct appeal in state court in an attempt to show that the claims were "fairly presented" to the state courts. See Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 278 (1971). After reviewing the record, we are no more convinced now than we were with his earlier petition that Petitioner has exhausted his state remedies. Because Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, see Lozada v. Deeds, 111 S. Ct. 860, 861-62 (1991), we deny Petitioner's request for a certificate of probable cause and DISMISS the appeal.



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 case therefore is ordered submitted without oral argument


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