Filed: Feb. 03, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 3 2003 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT PATRICK FISHER Clerk JONATHAN BRADY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. No. 02-2036 D.C. No. CIV-00-656-LH/WWD TIM LEMASTER, Warden, (D. New Mexico) New Mexico State Penitentiary; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Respondents - Appellees. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before SEYMOUR , EBEL , and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges. After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, thi
Summary: F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 3 2003 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT PATRICK FISHER Clerk JONATHAN BRADY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. No. 02-2036 D.C. No. CIV-00-656-LH/WWD TIM LEMASTER, Warden, (D. New Mexico) New Mexico State Penitentiary; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Respondents - Appellees. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before SEYMOUR , EBEL , and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges. After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this..
More
F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FEB 3 2003
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
JONATHAN BRADY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v. No. 02-2036
D.C. No. CIV-00-656-LH/WWD
TIM LEMASTER, Warden, (D. New Mexico)
New Mexico State Penitentiary;
ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
Respondents - Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before SEYMOUR , EBEL , and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges.
After examining appellant’s brief and the 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)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The 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.
Jonathan Brady, a New Mexico prisoner, requests a certificate of
appealability (COA) to appeal the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas
corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. A COA may be issued only when there is
“a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(2). To demonstrate his entitlement to a COA, Mr. Brady must show
“that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the
petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues
presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v.
McDaniel ,
529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000) (quotation omitted).
On appeal, Mr. Brady argues that the district court erred in failing to
require the State of New Mexico’s Department of Corrections to implement
a statutorily mandated alternative incarceration program under N.M. Stat. Ann.
§ 31-18-22, under which appellant was constitutionally entitled to apply for relief.
We have reviewed appellant’s brief and appendix. We find no error, and
affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge, as adopted by the district
court.
-2-
Appellant’s application for a certificate of appealability is DENIED and the
appeal is DISMISSED.
Entered for the Court
David M. Ebel
Circuit Judge
-3-