Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-07002/USCOURTS-ca10-89-07002-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jack Cowley
Appellee
Vernell Norris
Appellant

Document Text:

FI LED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

U<1ired States Court of Appe,als 

Tenth Circuit 

APR 2 4 1990 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

VERNELL NORRIS, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v. 

JACK COWLEY, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

No. 89-7002 

(D.C. No. 88-476-C) 

(E.D. Okla.) 

Before McKAY, ANDERSON, and TACHA, 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 case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

This is an appeal from the denial of a prose application for 

habeas corpus relief from a state court conviction after plea for 

first degree manslaughter, and unlawful delivery of marijuana 

* 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: 89-7002 Document: 01019972024 Date Filed: 04/24/1990 Page: 1 
after former conviction of two or more felonies. The trial court 

imposed two twenty-year sentences to run concurrently. 

The burden of plaintiff's appeal is that his plea to the 

underlying charges was not voluntary. On appeal, he places particular emphasis on his claim that he was not adequately notified 

that his sentence could be enhanced by the prior convictions. 

This issue was presented to the state court which determined that 

his plea was in fact voluntarily made. Even though such finding 

is a mixed question of fact and law, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) requires 

us to afford a presumption of correctness to state court findings. 

Case v. Mondragon, 887 F. 2d 1388 (10th Cir. 1989). In addition to 

the presumption of correctness, the "summary of facts" statement 

made by the appellant and signed by him and the state trial judge, 

his lawyer, and the prosecutor fully supports the state finding of 

fact. Particularly with reference to appellant being informed of 

the consequence of his plea, the form he signed disclosed to him 

the possibility of a life sentence, and furthermore disclosed to 

him that he would in fact receive precisely the sentence which the 

trial court imposed upon him in this case. All other components 

of voluntariness are likewise supported by his signed statement. 

Based upon these facts which appear of record, we conclude 

that appellant can make no rational argument on the law and facts 

in support of the issues raised on appeal. Coppedge v. United 

States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962); Ragan v. Cox, 305 F.2d 58 (10th Cir. 

1962). We therefore deny for that reason appellant's motion for 

leave to proceed without payment of costs or fees. Also based on 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-7002 Document: 01019972024 Date Filed: 04/24/1990 Page: 2 
the matters recited, we conclude that the appellant can make no 

showing of a denial of an important federal right by demonstrating 

that the issues raised are debatable among jurists, that a court 

could resolve the issues differently, or that the question 

deserves further proceedings. Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 

(1983). For that reason, we deny appellant's application for 

probable cause. 

The filing fee is waived; the appeal is dismissed; and the 

mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

Monroe G. McKay 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 89-7002 Document: 01019972024 Date Filed: 04/24/1990 Page: 3