FILED
United States Court of Appeals
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT February 16, 2018
_________________________________
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. No. 17-5088
(D.C. Nos. 4:17-CV-00383-JHP-MJX and
SAUL ANTONIO FLORES-LOPEZ, 4:12-CR-00041-JHP-3)
(N.D. Okla.)
Defendant - Appellant.
_________________________________
ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY*
_________________________________
Before MATHESON, KELLY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________
The district court denied Oklahoma state prisoner Saul Antonio Flores-Lopez’s
application for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the ground that it was
untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).1 To appeal that ruling, Mr. Flores-Lopez must
obtain a certificate of appealability (“COA”) from this court. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (requiring a COA to appeal “the final order in a habeas corpus
proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a
*
This order is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the
case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its
persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
1
In light of this court’s recent decision in United States v. Higley, No. 17-1111
(10th Cir. Sep. 29, 2017), this matter was abated and remanded on a limited basis for
the district court to consider whether to issue a COA. The district court denied a
COA on February 13, 2018, and we lifted our abatement.
State court”). To obtain a COA, he must show “that jurists of reason would find it
debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); accord Dulworth v. Jones, 496 F.3d 1133, 1137
(10th Cir. 2007).
Mr. Flores-Lopez does not address timeliness in his brief requesting a COA.
Although we liberally construe Mr. Flores-Lopez’s filings because he represents
himself, we do not act as his advocate. Yang v. Archuleta, 525 F.3d 925, 927 n.1
(10th Cir. 2008). Without an argument from Mr. Flores-Lopez as to why reasonable
jurists would debate the district court’s ruling, we must deny a COA and dismiss this
matter.
Entered for the Court
Scott M. Matheson, Jr.
Circuit Judge