A ft erexami ni ng the br i efs and appe l l at e r ecor d, thi s panel has det erm i ned * unani m ous l ythator al ar gum entw oul d notm at er i al l yas s i s tthe det erm i nat i on of th is a p p e a l. See F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a )(2 ); 1 0 th C ir. R . 3 4 .1 (G ). T h e c a se is ther efor e or der ed s ubm i t t ed w i thoutor al ar gum ent . T hi s or deri s notbi ndi ng pr ece dent , exce ptunderthe doctr i nes of l aw of the ca s e, r es j udi cat a, and col l at er al es t oppel . I tm aybe ci t ed, how ever , fori t s per s uas i ve val ue cons i s t ent w ith F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 2 .1 a n d 1 0 th C ir . R . 3 2 .1 . 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### Ju n e5,2007 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS F O R T H E T E N T H C IR C U IT VI NC E NT T ODD OC HOA, P e tit io n e r-A p p e llan t, v. L E NOR A J OR DAN, R es pondent - A ppel l ee. N o. 06- 6189 ( D. C. No . CI V- 0 5 - 1 5 4 - R) (W .D . O k la .)

OR DER DENY I NG CERTI FI CATE O F AP PEALABI LI TY * B efor e T AC HA , C hi ef J udge , KELLY and O’ BR I EN , C i rcui tJudg es.

A n O kl ahoma j uryconvi ct ed V i ncentT odd O choa of fi r s tdegr ee mur der and he w as s ent ence d t o l i fe w i thoutpar ol e. A ft erexhaus t i ng hi s s t at e r emedi es o n d ire c t ap p e a l an d th ro u g h p o st-c o n v ictio n p ro c e e d in g s, h e b ro u g h t th is 2 8 U. S . C. § 2 2 5 4 p e t i t i o n fo ra wr i to f h a b e a s c o rp u s i n fe d e r a l d i s tr i c tc o u r t . He n o w a p p e a ls th e d is tr ic t c o u rt ’s d e n ia l o f h is p e titio n .- 2-

I n or dert o pr ocee d on appea l , M r . O choa r equi r es a ce r t i fi cat e of a p p e a la b ility (C O A ). Id. § 2253( c) . I n s uppor tof hi s appl i cat i on fora C O A , he rai ses the fo l l ow i ng i ssues: ( 1) the tr i al courtadmi t t ed and/ orfai l ed t o r edac ta vi deot aped pol i ce in ter ro g a tio n in v io latio n o f P e tit io n e r’s F if

th a n d F o u rte e n th A m end m ent r i gh t s. ( 2) the tr i al courtadmi t t ed pr ej udi ci al and i nfl amm at oryphot ogr aphs i n vi ol at i on of Pet i t i oner ’ s Si xth, E i ghth, and Four t eenth A m endment ri gh t s. (3 ) th e a d m iss io n o f

o th e r c rim e s e v id e n c e v io late d P e tit io n e r’s S ix th and F ou rt eenth A m end m ent r i gh t s. (4) the ad m issi o n o f im p rop er o p inion test im o n yv iolated P eti ti o n er’s F ou rt eenth A m end m ent r i gh t s; ( 5) appel l at e couns el w as i neffect i ve forfai l i ng t o r ai s e on di r ect a p p e a l issu e s o f

in e ffe c tiv e a ss ista n c e o f trial c o u n se l an d fa ili n g to r eques tan evi dent i aryhear i ng; and ( 6) cumul at i ve err orbytr i al couns el deni ed hi m the r i ghtt o effect i ve a ss ista n c e o f

c o u n se l an d d e p riv e d h im o f a f u n d a m e n tallyfa ir trial. A p p lic a tio n fo r C e rt . o f A p p e a la b ility, a t 1 A . W e maygr antM r . O choa a C O A onl yi f he “ has m ade a s ubs t ant i al s how i ng of the deni al of a c ons t i tut i onal r i ght . ” Id. § 2 2 5 3 (c)(2). T h is st an d ard re q u ire s “ a d e m o n stra tio n th a t . . . inc lu d e s s h o w in g th a t re a so n a b le ju rists c o u ld debat e w hether( or , forthatm att er , agr ee that ) the pet i t i on s houl d have be en re so lv e d in a d iffe re n t m a n n e r o r th a t th e iss u e s p re se n ted w e re a d e q u a te to des erve enc our agementt o pr ocee d fur ther . ” Slack v . McD ani el , 529 U . S. 473, 4 8 4 (2 0 0 0 ) ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s o m itte d ). U pon car eful cons i der at i on of M r . O choa’ s appl i cat i on forC O A , hi s br i ef on appea l , the r ecor d, and the appl i cabl e l aw , w e conc l ude, fors ubs t ant i al l ythe- 3-

s ame r eas ons s t at ed i n the di s tr i ctcourt ’ s or derof M ay24, 2006, and the m agi s tr at e j udge’ s r eportand r ecomm endat i on of M ar ch 31, 2006, thatM r . O choa h a s fa ile d to d e m o n s tr a te h is e n title m e n t to a C O A u n d e r t h e a p p lic a b le s ta n d a rd s . W e th e re fo re D E N Y h is a p p lic a tio n fo r a C O A a n d D IS M IS S th is a p p e a l. M r . O choa’ s m ot i on t o pr ocee d i n form a paupe r i s on appea l i s gr ant ed. A l l other pendi ng m ot i ons ar e deni ed.

E n tered fo r th e C o u rt E L IS A B E T H A . S H U M A K E R , C lerk B y: D ep u tyC lerk