Maske v. Aurora Animal Care
This text of 365 F. App'x 933 (Maske v. Aurora Animal Care) 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
*934 ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY **
This appeal arises out of multiple case filings in district court for a Writ of Habe-as Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner Jerry Maske is a frequent filer in district court and is subject to filing restrictions. Because Maske failed to follow filing requirements, the district court dismissed the case without prejudice.
Maske now requests a certificate of ap-pealability (COA) to pursue an appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (requiring a COA to appeal a denial of a habeas application). He makes the same arguments he made in Maske v. Murphy, 365 Fed.Appx. 938 (10th Cir.2010). For the same reasons set forth in that case, we DENY the application for a COA.
Because his application for a COA is frivolous, we DENY his request to proceed informa pauperis.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
365 F. App'x 933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maske-v-aurora-animal-care-ca10-2010.