Wheeler v. Cline
670 F. App'x 987
| 10th Cir. | 2016Background
- Brett Wheeler, a Kansas state prisoner, was convicted in 1987 of two counts of rape and two counts of aggravated criminal sodomy.
- Wheeler previously filed federal habeas corpus petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in 2000 and 2008; the 2000 petition was dismissed as untimely and the 2008 filing was treated as an unauthorized successive petition.
- The Tenth Circuit denied Wheeler authorization to file the 2008 successive habeas application.
- In 2016 Wheeler filed another § 2254 petition in district court challenging one sodomy conviction as the product of a general verdict.
- The district court dismissed the 2016 petition for lack of jurisdiction as an unauthorized second or successive § 2254 application.
- Wheeler sought a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the dismissal; the panel considered whether jurists of reason could debate the procedural ruling under Slack v. McDaniel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court had jurisdiction to hear Wheeler's 2016 § 2254 petition | Wheeler argued the merits of his claim attacking one aggravated sodomy conviction (general verdict issue) and implicitly that the court should consider it | The State and district court argued the 2016 petition was an unauthorized second or successive petition and the district court lacked jurisdiction absent Tenth Circuit authorization | The court held the district court lacked jurisdiction because Wheeler's earlier adjudication on the merits triggered the second-or-successive restrictions; COA denied |
| Whether jurists of reason could debate the district court’s procedural ruling (Slack procedural prong) | Wheeler focused on merits and did not meaningfully contest the procedural basis | The procedural basis (untimely/adjudicated earlier petition) was clear and dispositive | No reasonable jurist could debate the procedural ruling; Wheeler failed to satisfy Slack; COA denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (explains COA standards when dismissal rests on procedural grounds)
- In re Cline, 531 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2008) (district courts lack jurisdiction to adjudicate second or successive § 2254 petitions absent circuit authorization)
- In re Rains, 659 F.3d 1274 (10th Cir. 2011) (adjudication of a petition as untimely counts as an adjudication on the merits for second-or-successive purposes)