Opinion ID: 172707
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Unresolved State Post-Conviction Motions

Text: Kilgore also argues the limitations period has remained tolled from the time he filed his first state post-conviction motion because two motions remain pending. He has not produced evidence concerning these allegedly unresolved motions. It is unclear whether they were properly filed or whether they in fact remain pending. Indeed, the docket caption on one of the motions alleges a claim for ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel, a claim already rejected by the Colorado Court of Appeals. Kilgore did not present this issue to the district court and in fact discussed only the four postconviction motions resolved by the Colorado courts. Generally, we will not address issues raised for the first time on appeal. See United States v. Mora, 293 F.3d 1213, 1216 (10th Cir. 2002). In spite of our charitable reading of pro se petitions, we see no reason to depart from our general rule here.4