Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-06073/USCOURTS-ca10-90-06073-0/pdf.json

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

---

.. , 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

AUG O 6 19SO 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

CHARLES EDWARD OWENS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

STEPHEN W. KAISER, and 

ATTORNEY GENERAL, State of 

Oklahoma, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 90-6073 

(D.C. No. CIV-89-2060-T) 

(W.D. Oklahoma) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before MCKAY, MOORE, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

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 cause is therefore 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. 

Appellate Case: 90-6073 Document: 010110039624 Date Filed: 08/06/1990 Page: 1 
I 

I 

Petitioner Charles Edward Owens appeals the district court's 

dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 

Mr. Owens was incarcerated after conviction by a jury of a 

misdemeanor count of larceny of merchandise from a retailer and a 

felony count of larceny of merchandise from a retailer after 

former conviction of two or more felonies. Mr. Owens was 

sentenced to thirty days imprisonment and a $50 fine for the 

misdemeanor conviction, and under Oklahoma sentence enhancement 

statutes for habitual offenders, Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 51 

(West 1983), Owens received a forty-five year sentence for the 

felony conviction. The convictions were affirmed on appeal. 

Owens v. Oklahoma, Nos. F-86-882 and M-87-236 (Okla. Crim. App. 

August 15, 1989). 

Mr. Owens filed an application for post conviction relief in 

the United States District Court of Comanche County which was 

denied. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the 

district court's order denying post-conviction relief. 

State, No. PC-89-1112 (Okla. Crim. App. Nov. 8, 1989). 

Owens v. 

In his petition for a writ of habeas corpus before the 

federal district court, Mr. Owens alleged a "denial of effective 

assistance of appellate counsel" based upon his court-appointed 

appellate counsel's failure to adequately raise the issue asserted 

in Ground Two of his petition: that "Petitioner's sentence was 

unconstitutionally enhanced under the second and subsequent 

offender statute by use of unproven prior felony convictions." 

The district court observed that Mr. Owens did not present any 

evidence or allegation that raised any doubt as to the validity of 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-6073 Document: 010110039624 Date Filed: 08/06/1990 Page: 2 
I 

the prior convictions. Concluding that pursuant to the 

documentary evidence introduced at his trial, a rational jury 

could have found Mr. Owens had previously been convicted of two 

felonies, the district court rejected Ground Two of Mr. Owens' 

petition. The district court also held the failure of Mr. Owens' 

counsel to raise as a general issue the sufficiency of the 

evidence of prior convictions did not prejudice Mr. Owens. We 

agree and affirm the district court's judgment denying the writ of 

habeas corpus. 

In this appeal, Mr. Owens raises a new issue of whether the 

trial court failed to instruct the jury on the lesser crime of 

petit larceny. We need not address this claim. It was not 

presented to the district court in the petition for writ of habeas 

corpus or in the petitioner's district court brief. See Hopkinson 

v. Shillinger, 866 F.2d 1185, 1217 (10th Cir. 1989), and appears 

to be an allegation of an error in state law which is not subject 

to federal habeas corpus. 

The order of the district court is AFFIRMED. 

Entered for the Court 

John P. Moore 

Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 90-6073 Document: 010110039624 Date Filed: 08/06/1990 Page: 3