Ayala v. Zavaras ( 1998 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            F I L E D
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    NOV 5 1998
    TENTH CIRCUIT
    PATRICK FISHER
    Clerk
    STEVEN AYALA,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.                                                      No. 98-1192
    (D.C. No. 98-D-67)
    ZAVARAS, Executive Director; GAIL                        (D. Colo.)
    NORTON, Attorney General of the
    State of Colorado,
    Respondents - Appellees.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
    Before PORFILIO, KELLY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges. **
    Petitioner-Appellant Steven Ayala, a pro se litigant, seeks to appeal the
    district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his petition for a writ of habeas
    corpus pursuant to 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
    (b)(1). He has filed a motion for leave to
    proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees and an application for a
    *
    This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
    doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court
    generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
    and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
    **
    After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge
    panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material
    assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th
    Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
    certificate of appealability. He has also requested court-apppointed counsel and
    seeks to supplement his pleadings.
    We agree with the district court that Mr. Ayala has not demonstrated that he
    has exhausted state court remedies regarding his claims. See 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
    (b)(1)(A); see also Demarest v. Price, 
    130 F.3d 922
    , 932 (10th Cir. 1997).
    Nor has he demonstrated futility. See 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
    (b)(1)(B)(i) & (ii); see also
    Wallace v. Cody, 
    951 F.2d 1170
    , 1171 (10th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, all pending
    requests for relief, including his motion to proceed in forma pauperis and his
    request for court-appointed counsel are DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
    Entered for the Court
    Paul J. Kelly, Jr.
    Circuit Judge
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 98-1192

Filed Date: 11/5/1998

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021