Clark v. Director Of The Department Of Corrections, No. 7:2013cv00450 - Document 2 (W.D. Va. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Glen E. Conrad on 10/01/2013. (kab)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
CLERK' OFFI U,S, ST. S GE DI COURT AT ROM OKEVVA FIED L I TH E UN I N TED STA TES D I STR I T CO UR T C FOR THE W ESTERN DI STRI OF VI CT RGI A NI ROANOKE DI SI VI ON JAM ES FERLON CLARK , OCT 2 2 - 1 23 JULI C. A D BK DEPU ,CL ERK LERK CASE NO .7: 3CV00450 1 Pe ii ne , tto r V. M E M O M N D U M O PI I N N O DI RECTOR OF TH E DEPARTM ENT O F C O R REC TI N S, O By: G l n E.C o e nrad C hi fU nie St e Di t i tJudge e t d at s s r c R e ponde . s nt J m e Fe l Clr a Vigi a i t pr e ng pr K ,fl d t spe ii f a m i of n s ron a k, r ni nma e oce di o ie hi tton or t . h b a c mus p zs a tt 28 U.. j2 5 c aln i te Aug t2 0 j d me to te aes o , t un o r SC. 2 4, h le gng h us 0 7 u g n f h Ptl kiCount Cic tCour t las y r ui t mderwhih he sa c c e ofmuli e c s ofr pe a c t nds onvit d tpl ount a nd a uci n a r l t c ge a s ntnc d t 320 ye si prs Thi c tsr or i c t s bd to nd e aed hr s nd e e e o m' n ion. s our' ec d ndi a e t tClr prvi l fld aj225 peii co e ngt smeconvitons Clr v.Die t , ha ak e ousy ie 4 tton nc mi he n ci , ak r cor Cii Acin No 7:0 0 0 ( . Va S p .1 ,2 0 ,a p a ds d, 1Fe .Ap x 6 vl t o . 1 CV0 0 6 W D. . e t 3 01 ) p e l im' 41 d p' 31 Cl k' r ii s ( b. 8 2 1 . Thus, ar scurentpetton i asubsequentone, fli t e t p o iiin Fe 1 , 01 )1 al md r he r hbto ng i 28U. C. 2 4 ( )a ans as c n o s c e sv p tto n S. j 2 4 b g i t e o d r u c sie eiin. Ptruan t j2244(9,afderldititc tma c i ras ondors e svej225 ls t o 1 e a src our y onsde ec ucc s i 4 pe ii o y upo s i c rii ai n fo t Unie Sut sCour ofAppea sf t Fourh tton nl n peclc e tfc to r m he t d e t l or he t Cic i t a te camsi t ep tto me tc ran ciei. j2 4 ( ) Be a s Clr ha n t r ut h t h li n h eiin e e ti rtra 2 4 b . c u e ak s o obt i d s h c rii ton by t Cour ofAppe s t c twildimis t pe ii n wihout ane uc e tfcai he t al, he our l s s he tto t p eudc a s c e sv .Ana p o raeo d rwi e trt i d y. rj ie s u c sie p r p it r e l ne h s a l The cer i diece t s c es oft s me or ndum opi on a ac om pa ng l k s r td o end opi hi m a ni nd c nyi or rt pe ii . de o ttoner ENTER:Thi l da ofocobe , 2 3 s 1:- y - t r :1 . Chi Unied St t D i t i tJ e ef t a es sr c udg 1 Cl k al o pr vi y fl a ci lac i chale ng t valdiy ofhi confnem e on t e ar s e ousl ied vi ton lngi he i t s i nt hes convitons s ng t be alowed t pr ent w ines es a c i , eeki o l o es t s boutt e m a tr t cour cons r and hes te s; he t t ued dimis dt sc s a as c si j2 4 peiin. S eClr v. r co ,7: 1 027 ( . Va J ne s s e hi a e s uc e sve 25 tto e ak Die tr 1 CV0 4 W D. . u 1 2011. 6, )
]]>
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.
