Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-03018/USCOURTS-ca10-92-03018-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Attorney General of Kansas
Appellee
Robert D. Hannigan
Appellee
John Rupe
Appellant

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT SEP 1 71992 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

JOHN RUPE, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v. 

ROBERT D. HANNIGAN and ATTORNEY 

GENERAL OF KANSAS, 

Respondents-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

No. 92-3018 

(D.C. No. 89-3166-S) 

(D. Kansas) 

Before LOGAN, BARRETT and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously to honor the parties' request for a 

decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

Petitioner John Rupe, a prisoner in the Kansas State Penitentiary, appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas 

corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. S 2254. He was convicted by a 

jury of aggravated burglary and felony murder.. On direct appeal, 

* 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: 92-3018 Document: 010110322563 Date Filed: 09/17/1992 Page: 1
the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed. The only issues cognizable in 

federal court and on appeal to this court are claims of violations 

of the federal Constitution. Here petitioner seeks to overturn 

his conviction because the district court gave a presumption of 

intent instruction that violated Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 

510 (1979). 

The Kansas Court of Appeals, considering petitioner's postconviction petition under Kan. Stat. Ann.§ 60-1507, did not reach 

the merits. Relief was denied on procedural grounds because petitioner failed to raise in his appeal to the Kansas Supreme Court 

the constitutional challenge to the jury instruction. The state 

did not raise any procedural defense to petitioner's writ of 

habeas corpus filed in the district court. The district court 

deemed the defense waived and reached the merits of the claim, 

finding that although a Sandstrom instruction was given it was 

harmless error. We grant petitioner's application for a right to 

proceed in forrna pauperis and for a certificate of probable cause 

in order to review the merits of his claim. 

We have considered the arguments in petitioner's brief and 

have called up and reviewed the record of the state court proceedings. After such examination we are satisfied that the district 

court properly analyzed the issue and reached the correct conclusion. We therefore AFFIRM the district court's denial of relief 

for substantially the reasons stated in its Memorandum and Order 

filed January 14, 1992. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 92-3018 Document: 010110322563 Date Filed: 09/17/1992 Page: 2
The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

James K. Logan 

Circuit Judge 

·"l 

Appellate Case: 92-3018 Document: 010110322563 Date Filed: 09/17/1992 Page: 3