Rea v. Suthers
402 F. App'x 329
10th Cir.2010Background
- Rea, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks a COA to appeal the denial of his §2254 petition.
- Convicted in Colorado state court of multiple sexual offenses involving a child, some convictions merged/ vacated on direct appeal.
- Colorado Court of Appeals vacated the sexual assault on a child conviction as duplicative but affirmed other convictions; Colorado Supreme Court denied certiorari.
- After state post-conviction relief efforts failed, Rea filed a federal habeas petition raising three claims: insufficiency of the evidence, improper jury instructions/ verdict form, and Brady withholding evidence.
- District court dismissed some claims on procedural grounds, rejected the sufficiency claim on the merits, and denied leave to amend the Brady claim as futile.
- Rea seeks a COA to challenge the district court’s rulings and dismissals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence was constitutionally sufficient | Rea argues insufficiency based on lack of semen evidence. | Court properly applied the standard; testimony supports guilt independent of semen. | No; testimony sufficient to support conviction beyond reasonable doubt. |
| Whether Brady claim was properly held futile for failure to exhaust | Rea argues failure to disclose hair/fiber analyst violated Brady. | Claim procedurally defaulted; not fairly presented in state court; no cause to excuse default. | No; district court correctly denied leave to amend as futile due to default. |
Key Cases Cited
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (coA standard requires substantial showing; defer to state-court decision)
- Turrentine v. Mullin, 390 F.3d 1181 (10th Cir. 2004) (sufficiency of the evidence standard in habeas review)
- Tapia v. Tansy, 926 F.2d 1554 (10th Cir. 1991) (witness incredibility standard is high; not satisfied here)
- Bland v. Sirmons, 459 F.3d 999 (10th Cir. 2006) (exhaustion requirement and fair presentation)
- Duncan v. Henry, 513 U.S. 364 (1995) (mere similarity of claims is insufficient for exhaustion)
- Steele v. Young, 11 F.3d 1518 (10th Cir. 1993) (cause and prejudice to excuse default; standard)
- Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106 (10th Cir. 1991) (liberal construction of pro se filings)
- Sandoval v. Ulibarri, 548 F.3d 902 (10th Cir. 2008) (no evidentiary hearing required where record suffices)