Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-03312/USCOURTS-ca10-92-03312-0/pdf.json

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

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F I L L 0 

United States Court of Appeal11 

TENTH CIRCUIT Tenth Circuit 

JIMMIE LEE PARKER, ) 

) 

Petitioner-Appellant, ) 

) 

FEBO 5 1993 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 92-3312 

v. ) 

) 

STATE OF KANSAS; ATTORNEY GENERAL, ) 

STATE OF KANSAS, ) 

) 

(D.C. No. 92-3313) 

(D. Kan.) 

Respondents-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before SEYMOUR, ANDERSON, and EBEL, 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. 

Jimmie Lee Parker, a prose prisoner, brought this habeas 

corpus petition in forma pauperis, alleging numerous constitutional defects in his state criminal proceedings. The federal 

district court held that Mr. Parker had failed to exhaust his 

*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: 92-3312 Document: 010110166205 Date Filed: 02/05/1993 Page: 1 
state court remedies, dismissed the petition without prejudice, 

and declined to issue a certificate of probable cause. We agree 

that Mr. Parker has not demonstrated the necessary exhaustion of 

state remedies, and we deny his motions for in forma pauperis 

status on appeal and for a certificate of probable cause. 

"The law is well settled that as a matter of comity, federal 

courts should not consider a claim on habeas corpus until after 

the state courts have had an opportunity to act." Osborn v. 

Shillinger, 861 F.2d 612, 616 (10th Cir. 1988). "To fulfill the 

exhaustion requirement, a petitioner must present his claim to a 

state appellate court." Id. 

The prose pleadings before us, construed broadly, contain no 

indication that Mr. Parker has raised the substance of his 

constitutional claims either in a direct appeal of his state 

conviction or in state post-conviction proceedings. Indeed, in 

his federal habeas petition, Mr. Parker states that he has not 

presented these claims to the highest state court having 

jurisdiction because "[his] attorney told [him] the state courts 

would only hold [him] up . " Rec., vol. I, doc. 2 at 12. 

Regardless of whether Mr. Parker and/or his attorney believe the 

state courts will view his claims with favor, the claims must 

first be presented to those courts. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b), (c). 

Accordingly, Mr. Parker's claims were properly dismissed without 

prejudice for failure to exhaust the remedies available in the 

state courts. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 92-3312 Document: 010110166205 Date Filed: 02/05/1993 Page: 2 
Petitioner's motions to file this appeal without payment of 

fees and for a certificate of probable cause are DENIED. The 

mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3 -

Entered for the Court 

Stephanie K. Seymour 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 92-3312 Document: 010110166205 Date Filed: 02/05/1993 Page: 3 
Appellate Case: 92-3312 Document: 010110166205 Date Filed: 02/05/1993 Page: 4