Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-06029/USCOURTS-ca10-91-06029-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jack Cowley
Appellee
Ronald Daniel Kelly
Appellant

Document Text:

FI LED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Uni(ed States Court of Appeals 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

RONALD DANIEL KELLY, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

JACK COWLEY, Warden, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

TPrtJ, r i,_, ... il ;!' 

AUG 141991 

&OBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 91-6029 

(W.D. Oklahoma) 

(D.C. No. CIV-89-740-P) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and BRORBY, 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. 

On July 25, 1990, this court issued its Order and Judgment 

affirming the dismissal of a petition for habeas corpus filed by 

the petitioner herein, Ronald Daniel Kelly. At one part of the 

Order and Judgment we stated that the district court may have been 

* 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: 91-6029 Document: 010110132074 Date Filed: 08/14/1991 Page: 1 
' -. 

wrong in connection with its ruling on procedural default, but we 

held that Kelly stated no violation of his constitutional rights 

on the merits. We held on both procedural and merits grounds, 

stating: "Petitioner's challenge must fail on this basis (the 

merits] also." (Emphasis supplied). On December 14, 1990, Kelly 

filed in this action a new proceeding in the district court 

entitled "Independent Action For Relief From Judgment Under Rule 

60(b)." In the proceeding Kelly states that the district court 

should vacate its September 27, 1989, order dismissing Kelly's 

habeas action, on the ground that this court had declared that the 

district court was in error on its procedural bar analysis. Kelly 

then seeks to reopen all of the issues raised in his first habeas 

corpus petition, with some additional embellishment. 

We find the decision of the district court dismissing this 

newest proceeding by Kelly to be correct. Said proceeding misconstrues the opinion of this court, misapplies Fed. R. Civ. P. 

60(b), violates the rules with respect to rehearing of decisions 

of this court, and is a transparent attempt to circumvent the law 

with respect to successive and abusive habeas petitions. 

Kelly's motion for a certificate of probable cause is DENIED. 

The appeal is DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

DISMISSED. 

-2-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Stephen H. Anderson 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-6029 Document: 010110132074 Date Filed: 08/14/1991 Page: 2