Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03368/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03368-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF 

F 1 Lc!0Rp~\G APPEALSUn\tsd s,rc~h Circuit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

PERCY L. JETER, JR., 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v. 

RICHARD R. THORNBURGH, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

SEP 12 1991 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

Nos. 90-3337, 

90-3368, & 

91-3120 

(D.C. No. 90-3482-R) 

(D. Kansas) 

Before LOGAN, MOORE, and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges. 

Petitioner Percy L. Jeter was convicted of criminal violation 

of the District of Columbia Code and was subsequently transferred 

to the United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas (USPL), to 

serve his sentence. The district court denied his petition for 

habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Jeter v. 

Thornburgh, No. 90-3482-R, 1991 WL 49656 (unpubl.)(D. Kan. 

Mar. 14, 1991). Petitioner appeals pursuant to 28 u.s.c. § 2253. 

In response to petitioner's notice of appeal, the district 

* 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 estoppal. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-3368 Document: 010110090142 Date Filed: 09/12/1991 Page: 1 
court found the appeal to be frivolous and not taken in good 

faith. Based on this finding, the court denied petitioner leave 

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Dist. Ct. R. doc. 31. 

However, petitioner's motion for in forma pauperis status before 

this court is hereby 1 granted. Cases No. 90-3337 and 90-3368, 

both interlocutory appeals, are dismissed for mootness because of 

this court's disposition of petitioner's appeal on the merits 

herein. 

Each of the claims petitioner raises on appeal has been 

considered and was found to be lacking in merit in Blanga v. 

Thornburgh, F.2d __ , No. 91-3047, 1991 WL 154940 (10th Cir. 

2 Aug. 16, 1991). The judgment of the United States District Court 

for the District of Kansas is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue 

forthwith. 

Entered for the Court 

Per Curiam 

1 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 is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

2 Petitioner filed his prose petition for habeas corpus relief 

aided by two fellow inmates whom he described as jailhouse lawyers 

(referred to hereafter as "fellow inmates"). See Dist. Ct. R. 

doc. 26. During the pendency of petitioner's case, these fellow 

inmates filed requests for temporary restraining orders alleging 

retaliation against them by prison officials in response to their 

legal assistance to other inmates. Petitioner moved for stay of 

proceedings in the district court pending the outcome of the 

fellow inmates' requests for TRO. Id. However, petitioner had 

already filed his traverse, and all that remained in his action 

was for the court to rule. Thus, petitioner's access to the 

courts as to his petition for habeas corpus was complete at the 

time he submitted his motion for stay, rendering it moot. 

2 

Appellate Case: 90-3368 Document: 010110090142 Date Filed: 09/12/1991 Page: 2