Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-02080/USCOURTS-ca10-92-02080-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Rick G. Stallings
Appellant
Robert J. Tansy
Appellee

Document Text:

F I L "'"·· ,l UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States C,ourtofAppeal, Tenth Circuit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

RICK G. STALLINGS, ) 

) 

Petitioner-Appellant, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

ROBERT J. TANSY, ) 

) 

Respondent-Appellee. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

NOV 5 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 92-2080 

(D.C. No. 90-720-JB) 

(D. N.M.) 

Before McKAY, Chief Judge, SEYMOUR, and KELLY, 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 without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

Petitioner Rick G. Stallings appeals the denial of his 

petition for writ of habeas corpus. We vacate the district 

court's judgment and remand for reconsideration of Mr. Stallings' 

petition. 

* 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: 92-2080 Document: 010110145692 Date Filed: 11/05/1992 Page: 1 
Mr. Stallings raised four issues before the district court: 

(1) whether the trial court erred in refusing to give an 

instruction on simple batt_ery; (2) whether the trial court erred 

in admitting the audiotaped testimony of a witness; (3) whether 

the trial court erred in not granting a directed verdict; and (4) 

whether the trial court erred in allowing an amendment to the 

indictment. The magistrate judge's recommended decision, adopted 

by the district court, found that no error had occurred. 

Mr. Stallings' issues are fact specific, requiring a review 

of the state trial proceedings. The district court's docket 

sheet, however, does not contain any indication that the New 

Mexico trial record was before the district court. Because we 

cannot be sure whether the record was considered adequately when 

the case was decided, we cannot review the district court's 

decision. 

The judgment of the United States District Court for the 

District of New Mexico is VACATED, and the cause is remanded for 

further proceedings consistent with this order and judgment. 

Entered for the Court 

Monroe G. McKay 

Circuit Judge 

2 

Appellate Case: 92-2080 Document: 010110145692 Date Filed: 11/05/1992 Page: 2