Hassan Rizk v. John Prelesnik

Filing

OPINION filed : The district court's opinion is AFFIRMED, decision not for publication pursuant to local rule 206. Martha Craig Daughtrey, Circuit Judge; Raymond M. Kethledge and Bernice Bouie Donald, Circuit Judges.

Case: 10-1262

Document: 006111482078

Filed: 10/30/2012

Page: 1

FILED
Oct 30, 2012
DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION
File Name: 12a1118n.06
No. 10-1262
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

HASSAN RIZK,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
JOHN PRELESNIK,
Respondent-Appellee.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
MICHIGAN

OPINION

Before: DAUGHTREY, KETHLEDGE, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.
BERNICE BOUIE DONALD, Circuit Judge. Hassan Rizk filed a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging numerous constitutional violations arising from
his conviction for the murder of Sharon Rouse. The district court denied his petition for lack of
discernible constitutional error and also denied his motion for a certificate of appealability (COA).
We issued a COA to review the district court’s decision regarding Rizk’s Fifth Amendment claim,
which arose from his pre-arrest silence.
A review of the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law reveals that a panel opinion
further addressing the issue would serve no jurisprudential purpose. In granting the COA, we
recognized that the admissibility of pre-arrest, pre-Miranda silence was an “unsettled” matter among
the federal courts. This case, however, is an ill-suited vehicle for revisiting that question, in light

Case: 10-1262

Document: 006111482078

Filed: 10/30/2012

Page: 2

No. 10-1262
Rizk v. Prelesnik
of AEDPA’s jurisdictional constraints. Accordingly, we AFFIRM for the reasons stated in the
district court’s opinion.

-2-