Hendricks v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 7:2013cv00514 - Document 3 (W.D. Va. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge James C. Turk on 11/8/2013. (kab)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
r pprs OFFI U, DI GOURT a CE :, Sm ATROANOKE, VA FI LED d2# 28 2 1 93 I TH E U N I N TED STA TES DI STRI T C O U RT C FO R T H E W ESTERN D I STRI T O F V I G I I C R N A R O AN O K E DI SI N VI O GARY W AYNE HENDRI S, CK J A . ULI . BK , CLERK CASE NO .7: 3CV00514 1 Pe ii r tt one , M E M O M N D U M O PI I N N O V. CO M M OG EALTH O F VI RGI A, NI By: Jam e C.Tur s k Seni Uni e St esD i t i tJudge or t d at src Res ponde . nt Ga y W ay He i ks aVigi a i ae pr e ng pr K ,fl d tlspe ii f a wrt r ne ndrc , r ni nm t oc edi o ie li tton or i ofha sc pus puruan t 28U. C.j2254,c l ng hi 1 conviton i t Cic t bea or , s t o S. halengi s 997 ci n he rui Cour f t Ciy of Cha l t vil on c r of r bbe y and us of a fr a m i t t or he t rotes le ha ges o r e ie r n he c omm ison of a f l si eony. He i ks ha fl a petton syl a a I OTI ndrc s ied ii t ed s C M ON FOR DECLARATORY J UDGM EN T,' c le ng t c tt i lt of t Vigi a tlr ' ha lngi he onsiutona iy he r ni llee t srkes'sa ut unde whi h t Cou ts n e d hi t lf i prs a a r ci vit Ba e on ti ' tt e r c he r e t nce m o ie n ion s e di s . s d t na ur ofHe iks c am s s edng a fndi t tHendrc i wr uly c i d unde he t e ndrc ' l i - e l i ng ha iks s ongf l onfne r teCh ro ts il j d me t tec u ti d ta t s b sinmu tb c n tu d a ap tto h alte v l u g n - h o r tn s h t he u miso s e o sr e s eiin e f a wrtofha asc pust or i be or mder28U. C.j2254 a s S. nd ummaiy dimis d as s ce sve rl s se uc si , pur ua t 28 U .S. j2 4 (9. S e Go ae v.Cr b ,5 U. 5 4,5 0 3 ( 0 ) s nt o C. 2 4 1 1 e nz lz os y 45 S. 2 3 -2 2 05 . (i ig wh n a c i n l d fnd n fls mo in s e n r l f fo c i na j d me t fndn e rmi a ee a t ie to e kig ei r m rmi l u g n , e r a dl s oftte he as i i,t co ts ul c tue t t moton a a s es i ha as eg r es il sgns t he ur ho d onsr ha i s ucc sve be peii a dimisi a s esi ) tton nd s s t s ucc sve . Cour rcodsi c t t ti 2001 He rc fld a j2254 peii c eni t t e r ndiae ha n , nd iks ie tton onc r ng he sme Ch ro ts il j d me t algng cams o ief ci a ssa c , p o e u o il s alte v le u g n , le i li f n fe tve s itn e r s c t ra 1 Un rRue 4( o t RulsGo r ng 9 225 Ca e ,t e c ur ma s mma i d s s a de l b) f he e veni 4 s s h o t y u rl imis y j2 4 p tton Cifi plil a easfo t p ttona d a y atc e e bist ttepeiine i n t 25 e ii E q t any pp r r m he e ii n n ta h d xhi t ha h tto r s o g entted t r i i t dititcour.' il o elef n he src t' m iconduc ,a c te .The cour g a e t r s s t nd our nor t r ntd he e ponde ' moton t dim is He iks nts i o s s ndrc ' c am s a pr e al de a t d orwihoutme i. Se Hendrc v.Young,Ci lAc i No. l i s oc dm ly f ule t rt e iks vi ton 7: CV0 75 , 0 2 W L 3 51 7 4 ( . Va 2 0 ) a p a ds d 5 F. p' 7 0 (t Ci. 01 0 8 2 0 2 2 3 W D. . 0 2 , p e l im', 5 Ap x 0 4 h r 2 0 ) c r.d ne 5 U. 1 5 ( 0 4 . Th ,He d ikss c re t j2 4 p t in i a 0 3 , e t e id, 41 S. 01 2 0 ) us n rc ' u rn 25 ei o s t s e nt one fli unde t pr biin i 28 U. C. j 2244(9 a i t a s ond or ubs que , alng r he ohi to n S. 1 gans ec s ce svepe ii uc s i tton. Pmsln t j2 4 (9, f d rldsrc c u t y c n ie as c n o s c e sv j2 4 la t o 2 41 a e ea itit o r ma o sd r e o d r u c s ie 25 pe ii onl i pe ii rs c ess cik ce tfc ton fom t Unie Stt Cour ofAppe l tton y f ttone e m pe t rii a i r he t d aes t as f rt eFo rh Cic i t a tecamsi t epeiinme tc ran ciei .j2 4 ( )3 .Be a e o h u t rut h t h li n h t o e e ti rtra 2 4 b ( ) c us t He rc doesnotde nd iks monsr e t thehmso ane s h ce tt a i by t Cour ofAppeas tat ha bt i d uc rik ton he t l, t e c u twi d s s te p tto wih u p eu ie a s c e sve An a p o rae o d rwi h o r l imis h eiin t o t rj d c s u c s i . l p r p it r e l l e t rt s da n e hi y. The Clr i dieced t s nd co e oft s m e andlm o ni n and a co pa ng ek s r t o e pi s hi mor l pi o c m nyi or t pe ii ne . der o tto r ENTER: Thi s da ofN ove r 2013. y mbe , A J Se ni 2 ied St t Diki tJ t aes s c u
]]>
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.
