Both the Michigan Court of Appeals and subsequently the Michigan Supreme Court summarily denied Roush's delayed application for leave to appeal, stating that his applications failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief as required by Michigan Court Rule 6.508(D). See People v. Roush, No. 236736 (Mich.Ct.App. Dec. 10, 2001); People v. Roush, 649 N.W.2d 80 (Mich. 2002) (table). Roush then filed his pro se habeas corpus petition with the district court, asserting, inter alia, the following grounds for relief:

See People v. Roush, 603 N.W.2d 265 (1999) (table). Petitioner returned to the state trial court to pursue collateral relief. He was denied at all levels. See People v. Roush, No. 96-3122 FC (Calhoun County Cir. Ct. Nov. 17, 2000); People v. Roush, No. 236736 (Mich. Ct. App. Dec. 10, 2001); People v. Roush, 649 N.W.2d 80 (2002). Petitioner then filed a habeas petition, raising multiple claims.

On July 29, 2002, the Michigan Supreme Court denied leave to appeal for the same reason. See People v. Roush, 649 N.W.2d 80 (2002). B. The Federal Court Proceedings