Fairchild v Trammell

Fairchild appealed the rejection of his habeas petition. The panel affirmed. It held that Fairchild’s arguments that the decision of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals decision to not apply a new rule on child abuse murder in his case deprived him of due process and imposed ex post facto law on him, that the mens rea requirement made the death sentence here cruel or unusual punishment, and the trial court’s refusal to explain the meaning of life without parole deprived him of due process were indistinguishable from similar arguments previously rejected by 10th Circuit panels and the panel was bound by those circuit precedents . It also held that Oklahoma’s process to supplement the record when a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is raised in direct appeal and other protections provided Fairchild’s appellate counsel over a year to investigate the issue of organic brain injury form brain trauma and numerous cases allowing ineffectiveness claims in Oklahoma state death cases demonstrate that Oklahoma’s procedures provide a meaningful opportunity to raise issues and thus the procedural bar applied and prevented review of Fairchild’s claim.

 

Western Insurance Company v A and H insurance, Inc.

A & H appealed the district court remand to state court order. The panel dimissed. While acknowledging the district court made contradictory statements on the basis of its order, the panel held the best understanding is the district court ruled it lacked subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15 USC 1012(b). As orders based to a fair degree on lack of subject matter jurisdiction are not reviewable, the appeal had to be dismissed.