Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-07093/USCOURTS-ca10-92-07093-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
R. Michael Cody
Appellee
Donald Richard Maghe
Appellant

Document Text:

FILL U 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSUnit.ed S=h~~~1{ Appeal, 

DONALD RICHARD MAGHE, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

vs. 

R. MICHAEL CODY, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

DEC 14 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk . 

No. 92-7093 

(D.C. No. 92-311-8 ) 

(E.D. Okla.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before SEYMOUR, ANDERSON and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.** 

Petitioner-Appellant Donald Richard Maghe, an Oklahoma state 

prisoner, filed a prose petition for a writ of habeas corpus, 28 

U.S.C. § 2254, in the Eastern District of Oklahoma. The district 

court clerk dismissed the petition without prejudice for failure 

to comply with Rule 5 of the Rules of the United States District 

Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma which governs prisoner 

petitions and requires compliance with the uniform rules of 

ancillary forms f o r use in District Courts within the Tenth 

* 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. 

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of t his appeal. See Fed . R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case therefore is ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Appellate Case: 92-7093 Document: 010110152128 Date Filed: 12/14/1992 Page: 1 
Circuit . E .D. Okla. R. 5 (1 ) . See also Rules Governing§ 2254 

Cases, Rule 2( c ) (authorizing district courts to enact local rules 

requiring§ 2254 petitions t o be filed in a prescribed form) . 

While pro se petitions must be liberally construed, dismissal is 

proper for failure to comply with local rules. Rules Governing 

§ 2254 Cases, Rule 2 (e ) . Compliance with rules relating to the 

form of the petition "promote[s] judicial efficiency in processing 

prose litigation [and] .. . assist[s] lay prisoners in 

understanding the types of claims cognizable under the various 

statutes." Brandenburg v. Beaman, 632 F.2d 120, 122 (10th Cir. 

1980) (per curiam) , cert . denied, 450 U.S . 984 (1981). We have 

reviewed the document filed by Petitioner entitled "Brief in 

Support of Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus," and it does not 

remotely resemble the proper form, nor does it provide adequate 

information to determine the availability of relief to Petitioner 

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Accordingly, dismissal without prejudice 

was proper. Having failed to make a substantial showing of the 

denial of a federal right, see Lozada v. Deeds, 111 S. Ct . 860, 

861-62 (1991), Petitioner's request for a certificate of probable 

cause, 28 U.S . C. § 2253, is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. 

SO ORDERED. 

-2-

Entered for the Court 

Bobby R. Baldock 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 92-7093 Document: 010110152128 Date Filed: 12/14/1992 Page: 2