Clark vs. Uchtman, No. 06-2300 (10th Cir. 2007)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 6, 2007 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court RAYMOND CLARK, P e t i ti o n e r - A p p e l l a n t , No. 06-2300 ( D .C . N o . C I V - 0 5 - 1 3 3 8 W P J / W D S ) ( D . N .M .) v. A LA N U CH TM A N , W arden; TH E ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STA TE O F N EW M EX IC O, R e s p o n d e n t s -A p p e l l e e s . ORDER AND JUDGM ENT* B e f o r e B R I S C O E , H A R T Z , a n d H O L M E S , C i r c u it J u d g e s . A f te r e x a m i n i n g t h e b r i e f s a n d a p p e l l a te r e c o rd , t h i s p a n e l h a s d e te r m i n e d u n a n im o u s l y t h a t o r a l a r g u m e n t w o u l d n o t m a te r i a ll y a s s i s t t h e d e t e r m i n a tio n o f th is a p p e a l. S e e F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 ( a ) ( 2 ) ; 1 0 t h C ir . R . 3 4 . 1 ( G ) . T h e c a s e is th e re f o re o r d e r e d s u b m itte d w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. R a ym o n d C la rk a p p e a ls th e d is tr ic t c o u r t s d e n ia l o f h is 2 8 U .S .C . § * T h i s o r d e r a n d ju d g m e n t i s n o t b i n d i n g p r e c e d e n t e x c e p t u n d e r t h e d o c tr i n e s o f la w o f th e c a s e , r e s j u d i c a ta , a n d c o ll a te r a l e s t o p p e l. I t m a y b e c i t e d , h o w e v e r, f o r i ts p e rs u a s iv e v a lu e c o n s is te n t w ith F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 2 . 1 a n d 1 0 th C i r . R . 3 2 . 1 2 2 5 4 p e ti t i o n , i n w h i c h h e a r g u e d th a t h i s c o n v ic ti o n f o r f ir s t d e g r e e m u r d e r o f a p e a c e o f f ic e r s h o u l d b e v a c a te d b e c a u s e h e w a s d e n ie d e f f e c t i v e a s s i s t a n c e o f c o u n s e l a n d b e c a u s e h e is a c tu a lly in n o c e n t. M r . C l a r k p r e v io u s l y f il e d a § 2 2 5 4 p e t i t i o n i n 1 9 9 0 , i n w h i c h h e c h a ll e n g e d th e s a m e c o n v i c ti o n . T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t d e n ie d r e li e f o n th e m e r i t s , a n d th is c o u rt a f f ir m e d . S e e C l a r k v . T a n s y , N o . 9 1 - 2 1 9 1 , 1 9 9 2 W L 1 0 2 5 4 6 ( 1 0 t h C i r. 1 9 9 2 ) ( u n p u b l is h e d ) . A d i s t r i c t c o u r t d o e s n o t h a v e ju r i s d i c ti o n t o a d d r e s s t h e m e r i t s o f a s e c o n d o r s u c c e s s i v e p e ti t i o n u n t i l t h i s c o u r t h a s g r a n te d th e r e q u ir e d a u t h o r i z a tio n u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 4 4 ( b ) ( 3 ) ( A ) . S e e 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 4 4 ( b ) ( 3 ) ( A ) ( B e f o r e a s e c o n d o r s u c c e s s i v e a p p l i c a t i o n p e r m i t te d b y t h i s s e c ti o n i s f il e d in th e d is t r i c t c o u r t , t h e a p p li c a n t s h a ll m o v e in t h e appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to c o n s i d e r t h e a p p l i c a t i o n . ) ; P e a s e v . K l i n g e r , 1 1 5 F .3 d 7 6 3 , 7 6 4 ( 1 0 t h C i r. 1 9 9 7 ) ( T h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t h a d n o j u r i s d i c ti o n t o d e c i d e [ t h e p e t it io n e r s ] § 2 2 5 4 p e ti t i o n w i t h o u t a u th o r i t y f r o m t h e c o u rt o f a p p e a ls . ) . T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s h o u ld h a v e tr a n s f e rr e d th e a c tio n to th is c o u r t . S e e C o l e m a n v . U n i t e d S ta t e s , 1 0 6 F . 3 d 3 3 9 , 3 4 1 ( 1 0 t h C i r . 1 9 9 7 ) ( [ W ] h e n a s e c o n d o r s u c c e s s i v e p e ti t i o n f o r h a b e a s c o r p u s r e li e f u n d e r § 2 2 5 4 o r § 2 2 5 5 m o t i o n is filed in the district court w ithout the required authorization by this court, t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s h o u l d t r a n s f e r t h e p e ti t i o n o r m o t i o n t o t h i s c o u r t i n t h e 2 i n t e r e s t o f ju s t i c e p u rs u a n t t o [ 2 8 U .S . C .] § 1 6 3 1 . ) . A t t h e v e ry l e a s t , t h e c o u r t s h o u ld h a v e d is m is s e d th e p e titio n f o r l a c k o f ju r i s d ic tio n . S e e Spitznas v. Boone, 464 F.3d 1213, 1227 (10th C ir. 2006) ( Since the claim w a s s u c c e s s i v e ... t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t . .. c o u ld o n l y d i s m i s s t h e p e ti t i o n o r t r a n s f e r i t to u s f o r c e rt if ic a tio n . ) . H o w e v e r , w e w i l l c o n s tr u e th e p l e a d i n g s f i l e d i n th i s c o u r t a s a r e q u e s t u n d e r § 2 2 4 4 ( b ) ( 3 ) ( A ) f o r a u th o r i z a ti o n t o f il e a s e c o n d § 2 2 5 4 p e t i t i o n . Id . a t 1 2 1 9 n . 8 ( O f c o u r s e , c o n s i s t e n t w it h o u r p r i o r p r a c t i c e , w e m a y, b u t a r e n o t re q u i re d t o , e x e r c i s e d i s c r e t io n t o c o n s t ru e a r e q u e s t f o r a c e rt i f ic a te o f a p p e a la b il i t y a s a n a p p li c a ti o n t o f il e a s e c o n d o r s u c c e s s i v e p e t i ti o n , o r v i c e v e r s a a s w a r r a n t e d i n t h e i n t e r e s t s o f j u s t i c e . ) ( c i t in g t o P e a s e , 1 1 5 F .3 d a t 7 6 4 ) . I n o r d e r t o o b t a i n s u c h a u t h o r i z a t i o n M r . C la r k m u s t m a k e a p r i m a f a c i e s h o w i n g t h a t s a ti s f ie s § 2 2 4 4 ( b ) ( 2 ) s c r i t e r i a f o r t h e f il i n g o f a n o th e r h a b e a s p e t i ti o n . T h a t s e c t i o n r e q u i r e s t h a t : ( 2 ) A c la im p r e s e n te d i n a s e c o n d o r s u c c e s s i v e h a b e a s c o r p u s a p p l i c a ti o n u n d e r s e c ti o n 2 2 5 4 th a t w a s n o t p r e s e n te d in a p r i o r a p p li c a ti o n s h a ll b e d is m i s s e d unless-( A ) t h e a p p li c a n t s h o w s t h a t t h e c la im r e li e s o n a n e w r u l e o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l a w , m a d e r e tr o a c ti v e t o c a s e s o n c o ll a te r a l r e v ie w b y t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t , t h a t w a s p r e v io u s l y u n a v a il a b le ; o r ( B ) ( i ) t h e f a c tu a l p r e d ic a te f o r t h e c la im c o u l d n o t 3 h a v e b e e n d i s c o v e r e d p r e v i o u s l y t h r o u g h t h e e x e r c is e o f d u e d il i g e n c e ; a n d ( i i ) t h e f a c ts u n d e r l yi n g t h e c l a im , i f p r o v e n a n d v i e w e d i n l i g h t o f th e e v id e n c e a s a w h o l e , w o u l d b e s u f f ic ie n t to e s t a b li s h b y c le a r a n d c o n v in c in g e v id e n c e t h a t, b u t f o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l e r r o r , n o r e a s o n a b le f a c tf i n d e r w o u l d h a v e f o u n d t h e a p p li c a n t g u i l t y o f th e u n d e rl yi n g o f f e n s e . B a s e d o n o u r r e v i e w o f t h e i m p l ie d a p p l ic a t io n , w e h o l d t h a t M r . C l a r k h a s f a il e d to m a k e a p r i m a f a c ie s h o w i n g t h a t t h e s u c c e s s i v e p e ti t i o n s a ti s f ie s t h e a b o v e r e q u ir e m e n t s . H e in v o k e s n o n e w r u l e o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, a n d n o r d o e s h e r e ly o n a n y n e w l y d i s c o v e re d e v id e n c e . H i s a ll e g a ti o n s o f i n n o c e n c e a re m e r e ly c o n c lu s o r y a n d n o t s u p p o r t e d b y a n y e v id e n c e whatsoever. T h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t o r d e r is V A C A T E D , a n d th e im p l i e d a p p li c a ti o n f o r a u t h o r iz a t i o n t o f i le a n o t h e r § 2 2 5 4 p e t it i o n i s D E N I E D . T h i s m a t t e r i s DISM ISSED. ENTERED FOR THE COURT PER CU RIA M 4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.