Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-03331/USCOURTS-ca10-91-03331-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert Casey
Appellee
G. L. Henman
Appellee
Jerry R. Ivy
Appellant
J. Michael Quinlan
Appellee
Richard R. Thornburgh
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

JERRY R. IVY, ) 

) 

Petitioner-Appellant, ) 

) 

V • ) 

FILJ~D , 

U · ,...,1 Sta.•.-ci Court oi App~.:.::; Dlt.4::U ....,.": • • .. Tenth CtrCUl • 

APR 2 n 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKEP.. 

Clerl: 

Nos. 90-3367 

) 

J. MICHAEL QUINLAN, G. L. HENMAN, ) 

RICHARD R. THORNBURGH, ROBERT CASEY,) 

) 

& 91-3331 

(D.C. No. 90-3443-R) 

(D. Kansas) 

Respondents-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before LOGAN, BARRETT and EBEL, Circui t Judges. 

This matter is before the court on petitioner Jerry R. Ivy's 

motion for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs 

or fees. 

In order to succeed on his motion, petitioner must show both 

a financial inability to pay the required filing fees and the 

existence of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and 

facts in support of the issues raised on appeal. See 28 u.s.c. 

S 1915(a); Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962); Ragan 

v. Cox, 305 F . 2d 58 (10th Cir. 1962) . 

* 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: 91-3331 Document: 010110246208 Date Filed: 04/29/1992 Page: 1
Petitioner sued the United States attorney general, the 

director of federal prisons, the warden of the United States 

prison at Leavenworth, the governor of Pennsylvania, and others, 

challenging his incarceration in the federal penetentiary pursuant 

to agreement between the state of Pennsylvania and the United 

States prison system. Petitioner argues that his transfer to a 

federal prison to serve a term of imprisonment imposed by a 

Pennsylvania state court violates the Compact Clause of the United 

States Constitution and petitioner's rights under the Due Process 

Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 

Insofar as petitioner's claims have a federal constitutional 

basis, we have disposed of them adversely to petitioner in 

Stevenson v. Thornburgh, 943 F.2d 1214 (10th Cir. 1991). See also 

Blango v. Thornburgh, 942 F.2d 1487 (10th Cir. 1991). Insofar as 

the claims are based upon a violation of Pennsylvania law, and 

that state officials have no authority under Pennsylvania law to 

contract with the U.S. prison system, the complaint does not state 

a federal constitutional claim. For these reasons, the district 

court properly denied relief and the right to proceed in forma 

pauperis. 1 

We conclude that petitioner can make no rational argument on 

the law or facts in support of the issues raised on appeal. 

Therefore, the motion for leave to proceed on appeal without 

prepayment of costs or fees is denied. The appeal is DISMISSED. 

1 Case No. 90-3367, an interlocutory appeal also filed by petitioner, is hereby dismissed for mootness because of our disposition of petitioner's appeal on the merits herein. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-3331 Document: 010110246208 Date Filed: 04/29/1992 Page: 2
The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

James K. Logan 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-3331 Document: 010110246208 Date Filed: 04/29/1992 Page: 3