King v. Andrews, No. 1:2019cv01347 - Document 20 (E.D. Va. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Rossie D. Alston, Jr on 6/9/2021. (kgall) (C/S to plaintiff)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
King v. Andrews Doc. 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division Ladarreus Torrell King, Petitioner, v. J. Andrews, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:19cv1347 (CMH/fCB) MEMORANDUM OPINION Federal inmate Ladarreus Torrell King ("King" or "petitioner") filed a 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 petition for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") violated his due process rights by failing to provide him with a copy of a Discipline Hearing Officer's ("DHO") report in a timely fashion following a hearing, which resulted in his administrative appeal being dismissed. On October 9, 2020, respondent filed a motion to dismiss [Dkt. No. 9], with a brief in support and exhibits, and provided petitioner with the notice required by Local Rule 7(K) and Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975). [Dkt. No. 9-1]. On October 21, 2020, King moved for an extension of time due to a modified lockdown at his facility due to COVID-19, which limited his access to the law library. [Dkt. No. 12]. The motion was granted by Order dated October 27, 2020, which made King's response due on or before December 11, 2020. [Dkt. No. 12]. King filed a second motion for extension of time on December 11, 2020 due to the COVID-19 modified lockdown and his inability to access the law library. The motion was granted by Order dated December 14, 2020 and made King's response due on or before January 28, 2021. [Dkt. Nos. 14, 15]. King filed a third motion for an extension on February 2, 2021 stating it was necessary due to the COVID-19 modified lockdown, which was granted by Order dated February 26, 2021 and made King's response due on or before April 12, 2021. [Dkt. Nos. 16, 17]. On April 7, 2021, King filed a fourth motion for extension of time Dockets.Justia.com IV. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, respondent's Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 9] is granted, and this petition must be dismissed with prejudice. An appropriate Order and judgment shall issue. Entered this t/ day of 2021. Alexandria, Virginia Isl Rossie D. Alston J United States Di tri t Judg e 10
]]>
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.
