Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02115/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02115-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert Samuel Chappell
Appellant
George Teague
Appellee

Document Text:

♦ 

/ 

f FILED .. ,, United Stat.es o,μrt~r Ap~ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth C1rcwt 

ROBERT SAMUEL CHAPPELL, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

vs. 

GEORGE TEAGUE, Sheriff, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

TENTH CIRCUIT OCT 1 G 1991 

ROBERT L. HOECKER. 

Clerk 

No. 91-2115 

(D.C. No. CIV-90-954-JC) 

(D. N.M.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before LOGAN, MOORE and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.** 

Petitioner-appellant Robert Samuel Chappell appeals prose 

from the district court's dismissal of his 28 u.s.c. S 2254 habeas 

corpus petition. Petitioner has failed to exhaust his state 

remedies. See 28 U.S.C. S 2254(b); Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509 

(1982}. Therefore, we deny a certificate of probable cause, see 

28 U.S.C. S 2253; Lozada v. Deeds, 111 S. Ct. 860 (1991), and 

* 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 this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a}; 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause therefore is ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Appellate Case: 91-2115 Document: 010110091354 Date Filed: 10/16/1991 Page: 1 
.. 

dismiss the appeal substantially for the reasons set forth in the 

attached district court order. 

Entered for the Court 

Bobby R. Baldock 

Circuit Judge 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-2115 Document: 010110091354 Date Filed: 10/16/1991 Page: 2 
'r 

_ , 

Tr1T Pr) - -- - _J _,_,J ---

u:,:-:-rn '.:': / .-:-:: :-1:;,· ICT COURT 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR1'..:.:::::·J:::. :J:.:!:. ! : .:\· . ,\ \:C .-.!G-~- -

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO , ,.. -, .. , - - , J •• l • l , I - Ji 

ROBERT SAMUEL CHAPPELL, !{3:Ju(/J?-;"/I~ e,,,!. 

Petitioner, C.3.K 

vs. CIVIL NO. 90-954 JC/SGB 

GEORGE TEAGUE, Sheriff, 

Respondent. 

• ERED 0~ DO<;KET 

.,. Ii . i C-: 1

- ·( \ 

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Respondent's 

Motion to Dismiss the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed 

J anuary 23, 1991. 

Petitioner, while a federal prisoner, was brought to Lea 

Co unty , New Mexico, for trial on securities fraud and related 

charges pursuant to the Interstate Agreement on Detainers. Section 

Jl- S-12 (N.M.S.A. 1978). Petitioner arrived in New Mexico on 

Nov e mber 27, 1989 and was later tried and convicted in September, 

1990. It is claimed that this delay violated the one hundred 

t~e nt y day speedy tri al provisions of the Agreement on Detainers 

c o ntained in Article 4(C). 

Petitioner must first seek relief in state court before 

seeki ng habeas relief in federal cou~t. This requirement exists 

e i ther because of comity or the mandate 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). Trigg 

v. Moseley, 433 F.2d 364 (10th Cir. 1970); Lewis v. State of New 

Mexico, 423 F.2d 1048 (10th Cir. 1970). See also, Cain v. 

Petrovsky, 798 F.2d 1194 (8th Cir. 1986); Echevarria v. Bell, 579 

.1 

Appellate Case: 91-2115 Document: 010110091354 Date Filed: 10/16/1991 Page: 3 
. - A 

I 

) 

r.2d 1022 (7th cir. 1988): Grant v. Hogan, 505 F.2d 1220 (3rd Cir. 

1974); Fells v. state of Kansas, 343 F.Supp. 678 (U.S.D.C. Kan. 

1972). 

Since Petitioner has not shown in any way that he has 

exhausted or attempted to exhaust his state remedies, the petition 

must be dismissed. 

IT IS ORDERED that the petition and this action are 

dismissed. 

JUDGE 

2 

Appellate Case: 91-2115 Document: 010110091354 Date Filed: 10/16/1991 Page: 4