United States Tenth Circuit

While Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510 (1979), created a "new" rule, it may not be applied retroactively on collateral review to defendant's claim of an improper jury instruction on intent, because it does not fall within an exception to nonretroactivity under Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989); having raised Sandstrom claim in the first of four post-conviction motions, defendant did not waive the claim by failing to raise it in all successive motions, as the denial of his first motion served as an adjudication on the merits by the state court.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/15/2002
• Published 04/15/2002

Judges

• HOLLOWAY, Senior Circuit Judge., Before BRORBY and HOLLOWAY, Senior Circuit Judges, and HENRY, Circuit Judge.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Stephen W. Kessler, Topeka, KS, for Petitioner-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Jared S. Maag, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Kansas Attorney General, Topeka, KS, for Respondents-Appellees.