Gray v. Kenney

Appellant was convicted of unlawful possession of four or more financial transaction devices and unlawful circulation of financial transaction devices in the first degree. Appellant was sentenced as a habitual criminal to two terms of imprisonment, the sentences to run consecutively. The Court of Appeals affirmed on direct appeal. After unsuccessfully seeking postconviction relief, Appellant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging that his convictions and sentences were void because the trial court made the habitual criminal determination utilizing the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” rather than the standard of “by a preponderance of the evidence.” Appellant then filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The district court denied Appellant’s motion, concluding that Appellant’s habeas corpus petition was frivolous. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court affirmed as modified, holding that the legal position asserted in Appellant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus was frivolous. View "Gray v. Kenney" on Justia Law