GREGG v. BLEDSOE, No. 1:2009cv00851 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. Signed by Judge John D. Bates on 04/23/09. (mmh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
,,,, . UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FILED MAY - 8 2009 NANCY MAYER WHITTIN DARRYL GREGG, U.S. DISTRICT c3lW;' CLERK Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. U9 0851 B.A. BLEDSOE, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the Court on petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner currently is serving terms of imprisonment imposed by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. See Pet. at 3. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals granted summary affirmance of his conviction, and subsequently denied petitioner's motion to recall its mandate. See id., Attach. A-B. Petitioner alleges that the District of Columbia Court of Appeals erred by refusing to address the merits of his constitutional claims, and, therefore, that its judgment affirming his conviction is void. See generally Mem. of Law in Support of Pet. for Writ of Habeas Corpus. It appears that petitioner demands review or reversal of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals' rulings. This Court "is without authority to review final determinations of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in judicial proceedings." District of Columbia Court ofAppeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 476 (1983). Because it is "[t]e highest court of the District of Columbia," its "[ fJinal judgments and decrees ... are reviewable by the Supreme Court of the I ~\ United States in accordance with [28 U.S.C. § 1257]." D.C. Code § 11-102. Furthermore, it is settled that "a District of Columbia prisoner has no recourse to a federal judicial forum unless the local remedy is 'inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention'" Byrd v. Henderson, 119 F.3d 34, 36-37 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (internal footnote omitted); Garris v. Lindsay, 794 F.2d 722, 726 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 993 (1986). Petitioner's lack of success in any previous attempts to collaterally attack his conviction or sentence does not render this remedy inadequate or ineffective. See Wilson v. Office a/the Chairperson, 892 F. Supp. 277, 280 (D.D.C. 1995). Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the petition. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will be issued separately on this date. United States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
