Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MAR 23 2001
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
MICHAEL SENA,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
JOE R. WILLIAMS, Warden, Lea
County Correctional Facility;
ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
No. 00-2241
(D.C. No. CIV-00-572-LH/LFG)
(New Mexico)
Respondents-Appellees.
made by the state court, as 28 U.S.C. 2254(d)(1) and (2) require. Therefore, the
district court concluded that Mr. Senas petition simply attempted impermissibly
to relitigate a state postconviction proceeding and presented no federal grounds
for relief. Rec. Vol. 1, Doc. 4 at 2.
On appeal, Mr. Sena again presents no basis for federal relief. First, he
reasserts arguments made below and in state court regarding his sentence
enhancement, which, as the district court rightly held, does not meet the
requirements for federal habeas review. Second, he argues that the dismissal of
his petition sua sponte by a district court judge other than the one originally
assigned to the case violates his due process rights. This circuit has consistently
held, in accordance with federal law and rules of procedure, that Each judge of
a multi-district court has the same power and authority as each other judge . . . .
Moreover, the District Judges have the inherent power to transfer cases from one
to another for the expeditious administration of justice." United States v. Diaz,
189 F.3d 1239, 1244 (10th Cir. 1999)(internal quotations and citations omitted).
To proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, an appellant must demonstrate a
financial inability to pay the required filing fees and the existence of a reasoned,
nonfrivolous argument on the law and facts in support of the issues raised on
appeal. Mr. Senas appeal is neither reasoned nor nonfrivolous in its arguments
and we therefore DENY his petition to proceed in forma pauperis. Similarly, in
-3-
-4-