Hill v. Whetsel
This text of 140 F. App'x 807 (Hill v. Whetsel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER
Petitioner-Appellant Kenneth D. Hill, who has been detained pending his trial in Oklahoma state court on criminal charges, appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for habeas relief. 1 Hill’s § 2241 petition asserts various complaints, including allegations that there were delays following his arrest in holding a probable cause hearing, instituting formal charges, and conducting an arraignment. The district court dismissed Hill’s petition because he failed to exhaust the available state court remedies.
A state detainee bringing a § 2241 claim must be granted a certificate of appealability (“COA”) prior to being heard on the merits of his or her appeal. See Montez v. McKinna, 208 F.3d 862, 867-69 (10th Cir. 2000). Because the district court denied Hill a COA, we deem Hill’s notice of appeal to be a renewed application for a COA. See Fed. R.App. P. 22(b)(2). However, we DENY Hill a COA for substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its orders dismissing Hill’s § 2241 petition and denying Hill a COA. Therefore, we DISMISS Hill’s appeal. 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
140 F. App'x 807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-whetsel-ca10-2005.