Bumpass v. Johnson ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 96-10475
    Summary Calendar
    KENNETH RAY BUMPASS,
    Petitioner-Appellant,
    versus
    GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEP’T OF
    CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
    Respondent-Appellee.
    - - - - - - - - - -
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:95-CV-211-Y
    - - - - - - - - - -
    November 5, 1996
    Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Texas prisoner Kenneth Ray Bumpass, #378073, appeals the
    denial of his habeas corpus petition as an abuse of the writ.
    Bumpass contends that he could not have brought his substantive
    contentions in his first habeas petition because he received
    ineffective assistance of counsel on that petition and because he
    did not understand the law then.   Bumpass also contends that he
    *
    Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
    except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
    47.5.4.
    No. 96-10475
    - 2 -
    is innocent because his indictment was defective.
    We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties
    and we find no reversible error.   Accordingly, we affirm the
    district court’s holding that Bumpass has failed to show cause
    for failing to raise his contentions in his first habeas petition
    for essentially the reasons relied on by the district court.     See
    Bumpass v. Scott, No. 4-95-CV-211-Y (N.D. Tex. Feb. 9, 1996).
    Bumpass raises his actual-innocence contention for the first time
    on appeal.   Bumpass has failed to demonstrate plain error, see
    Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 
    79 F.3d 1415
    , 1428 (5th
    Cir.)(en banc); he has not shown that he did not commit the acts
    that led to his conviction.   See Ward v. Cain, 
    53 F.3d 106
    , 108
    (5th Cir. 1995).
    AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 96-10475

Filed Date: 11/13/1996

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021