Narrative Opinion Summary
Gordon R. Schenkelberger appeals the district court's orders that denied his petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 and his motion for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) without prejudice. The court reviewed the records and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning that the petition was untimely. Consequently, a certificate of appealability is denied, and the appeals are dismissed. Additionally, Schenkelberger's request for appointed counsel is denied, and oral argument is deemed unnecessary as the issues are sufficiently presented in the existing materials. The document also notes a discrepancy in the spelling of the petitioner’s name throughout the district court records, clarifying the correct spelling as "Schenkelberger."
Legal Issues Addressed
Clerical Error in Spelling of Petitioner's Namesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court acknowledged and corrected the clerical error in the spelling of the petitioner's name in the district court records.
Reasoning: The document also notes a discrepancy in the spelling of the petitioner’s name throughout the district court records, clarifying the correct spelling as 'Schenkelberger.'
Denial of Appointed Counselsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The petitioner's request for appointed counsel was denied, as the court found no necessity for legal representation to resolve the issues presented.
Reasoning: Additionally, Schenkelberger's request for appointed counsel is denied, and oral argument is deemed unnecessary as the issues are sufficiently presented in the existing materials.
Denial of Certificate of Appealabilitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied a certificate of appealability, indicating that Schenkelberger did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
Reasoning: Consequently, a certificate of appealability is denied, and the appeals are dismissed.
Denial of Motion for Reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The motion for reconsideration was denied without prejudice, meaning it was not dismissed on merits but rather could be refiled.
Reasoning: Gordon R. Schenkelberger appeals the district court's orders that denied his petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 and his motion for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) without prejudice.
Untimeliness of Petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The petitioner's request under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 was denied due to being filed after the allowable time period.
Reasoning: The court reviewed the records and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning that the petition was untimely.