Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-86-02707/USCOURTS-ca10-86-02707-0/pdf.json

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

---

• 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

FILED 

Unit.ed Stat.es Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

JAMES NAUM, 

Petitioner-Appe llant, 

v. 

JOHN H. BROWN, Warden, Oklahoma 

State Penitentiary; MICHAEL TURPEN, 

Attorney General of the State of 

Oklahoma, 

Respondents-Appellees. 

FEB O 21989 

> ROBERT L. HOECKER 

) Clerk 

) 

) 

) No. 86-2707 

) (D.C. No. 85-C-320-C) 

) (N.D. Okla.) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

Before MCKAY, LOGAN, and SEYMOUR, 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. 

submitted withou t oral argument. 

The cause is therefore ordered 

Petitioner has filed a petition for rehearing from this 

court's order denying him a certificate of probable cause. Upon 

consideration thereof, the petition is granted and the mandate is 

recalled . 

Petitioner commenced this action in district court pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in which he alleged eight grounds for relief. 

Appellate Case: 86-2707 Document: 01019962606 Date Filed: 02/02/1989 Page: 1 
f 

The magistrate held a telephone status conference and determined 

that after the conference the only remaining issues were whether 

petitioner had been denied effective assistance of counsel and 

whether he had exhausted his state remedies. The district court 

held that petitioner had failed to exhaust his state remedies as 

to his effective assistance of counsel claims and, therefore, 

because the petition contained both exhausted and unexhausted 

claims, it must be dismissed under Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509 

(1982). Petitioner notified the district court that he had not 

dropped any of his claims but had only agreed that the effective 

assistance of counsel claims were the "Mount Everest" of his 

complaint. 

In his petition for rehearing from this 

petitioner argues that because the district 

designate which claims were not exhausted, he was 

the ability to follow the ROSE procedure." 

magistrate's recommendation appears to imply 

court's order, 

court did not 

"left without 

We agree. The 

that all 

petitioner's 

are unable 

claims were considered and some were exhausted. 

to determine which claims were determined to 

of 

We 

be 

exhausted. The case is remanded for clarification. 

Further, we note that petitioner also alleged claims more 

properly considered under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Freiser v. 

Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 498-9 (1973). These claims include 

petitioner's allegation that he was denied access to the courts, 

was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment by being "starved" 

while in jail, and that the prison guards conspired to have him 

killed (we note that this claim is supported by two affidavits 

2 

Appellate Case: 86-2707 Document: 01019962606 Date Filed: 02/02/1989 Page: 2 
from the inmate who allegedly made the attempt). These claims 

should be heard. Petitioner should be given the opportunity to 

amend his complaint to name the proper defendants as to these 

claims if necessary. 

The judgment of the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of Oklahoma is VACATED, and the case REMANDED 

f or further proceedings in accordance with this order and 

judgment. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

3 

Appellate Case: 86-2707 Document: 01019962606 Date Filed: 02/02/1989 Page: 3