Court Opinion

ID: 9950560
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-14 15:02:15.218194+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:37:25.358627
License: Public Domain

Appellate Case: 23-3255     Document: 010111015750          Date Filed: 03/14/2024      Page: 1
                                                                                       FILED
                                                                           United States Court of Appeals
                        UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                             Tenth Circuit

                              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT                               March 14, 2024
                          _________________________________
                                                                              Christopher M. Wolpert
                                                                                  Clerk of Court
  ANTHONY LEROY DAVIS,

        Petitioner - Appellant,

  v.                                                            No. 23-3255
                                                       (D.C. No. 5:23-CV-03222-JWL)
  DANIEL L. SCHNURR, Warden,                                      (D. Kan.)
  Hutchinson Correctional Facility,

        Respondent - Appellee.
                       _________________________________

             ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY*
                    _________________________________

 Before EID, KELLY, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges.
                     _________________________________

        Anthony Leroy Davis, a state inmate appearing pro se, seeks to appeal the district

 court’s dismissal without prejudice of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28

 U.S.C. § 2241. Mr. Davis sought to challenge a 2017 state court conviction for battery of

 a law enforcement officer for which he was sentenced to 65 months’ imprisonment. See

 State v. Davis, 449 P.3d 1232, at *2 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). The federal district court

 dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim given the type of relief requested. Davis

 v. Schnurr, No. 23-3222, 2023 WL 8519080, at *2–3 (D. Kan. Nov. 17, 2023).

        *
          This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case,
 res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value
 consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
Appellate Case: 23-3255      Document: 010111015750          Date Filed: 03/14/2024      Page: 2

        To appeal from the denial of a § 2241 petition, Mr. Davis must obtain a certificate

 of appealability demonstrating “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

 right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Montez v. McKinna, 208 F.3d 862, 867 (10th Cir. 2000).

 Where, as here, the district court denies a petition without reaching the merits of the

 constitutional claims, the petitioner must show “at least, that jurists of reason would find

 it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right

 and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in

 its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). The district court

 correctly observed that Mr. Davis’s challenge is to the validity of his conviction, not the

 execution of his sentence and as such is not cognizable under § 2241. Davis, 2023 WL

 8519080, at *2. Moreover, Mr. Davis previously and unsuccessfully challenged this

 conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and we denied a COA. See Davis v. Schnurr, No. 22-

 3131, 2022 WL 17175571, at *1 (Nov. 23, 2022).

        We DENY a COA, DENY IFP status, and DISMISS the appeal.

                                                Entered for the Court

                                                Paul J. Kelly, Jr.
                                                Circuit Judge

                                               2