Woolwine v. New River Valley Regional Jail, No. 7:2017cv00137 - Document 2 (W.D. Va. 2017)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Michael F. Urbanski on 5/11/2017. (tvt)

Download PDF

O - S OFFI U.S. SX COUr FRK' CE DI AT ROANOKE, VA FI ED i . MA 12 2 1 t 07 I TH E UNI N TED STATES DI STRI COURT CT FOR THE W ESTERN DI STRI OF W RGI A CT NI R O A N O K E D I SI N W O MI CHAEL LANDON W OOLW I NE, Peii n r tto e , NEW RI VER VALLEY REGI ONAL JAI L, Res ponde . nt ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) JULI G. U BK - , L C i lA c i N o.7: - vvi ton 17 c 00137 M E M O M N D UM O PI I N N O By: H on.M ihae F.Ur c l bans ki U nie St e Di t i Judge t d at s s r d M i ha lLa n W ool ne,aVigi ai t pm c e ngpr K ,fl d ape ii f wrt c e ndo wi r ni nma e e di o ie tton or i o ha e sc r u p ru n t 28U. C. 2 4.Pei o rc alng st ev ldt o hi f b a op s us a to S. j 25 tt ne h le e h aiiy f s i c nfn me t u s a t ot De e e 1 , 01 ,ud me t ft Cic tCo r o F o dCo ny o e n p ru n t he c mb r 3 2 6 j g n o he rui u t f l y u t . Afe r viwi t pe ii t c t i t ti s d bedim is d s ma iy pur ua t tr e e ng he tton,he our fnds ha t houl s s e um rl s nt o Ru1 4oft Rul Goveni j2254Ca e . e he es r ng s sl A f d rlc u t yn t rn aj2 5 h be sp tto t e st ep tto e e ha se t e ea o r ma o g a t 2 4 a a ei n mls h eiin r x u td he i r m e esa l ei t c t oft saei whi h pe iine wa c ded.28U . C. e di vaiabl n he ours he tt n c tto r s onvi S. j2 5 ()P esrv. rc e , 1U. 4 5(9 3; a o v. mi 4ù U. 5 (9 ) 2 4b; rie Rodiu z 41 S. 7 1 7 )Slytn S t 4 S. 3 1 71. h, Thee usi n r quie e i s ts i by s ki r vi w oft cai i t hi s sa ec t xha to e r m nt s a ifed ee ng e e he l m n he ghe t t t our wihj rs ito t c nsd rtecam .O'ulva v Bo rk l5 6U. 8 8( 9 9 .I t u id ci n o o i e h li S l n . ec e, 2 S. 3 1 9 ) n i Vig ni anon- a h r c c ca e us sa er m e e i oneoft e wa ,de ndi on r i a, de t ow onvi t n xha t tt e di s n hr e ys pe ng t na lr oft c am sr ie Fis,t c c c n fl adiec a a t t Vig ni Cotr of he tze he l i as d. rt he onvit a ie r t ppe l o he r i a lt Appeaswih a s e l t ubs quenta a t t Supr m eCour ofVigi ai t Cot 'ofAppe snles ppe l o he e t r ni f he ut al l Woolwine v. New River Valley Regional Jail Doc. 2 a i tt c c.VA. gans he onvit CODE j1 1- 1.Se nd,heco c c na t kt c ci 7. 41 co t nvit a tac he onviton c l t r ly by flng a s a e ha a pe ii n wih t cic tc twher t c ola e a l i t t be s tto t he r ui our e he onvi tw a c s c ce a t na alnga a rede sont t SuprmeCour ofVigi a I j8. onvitd nd he ppe i n dves cii o he e t r ni. d. 01 . jA pettonm aybedim is ptrua t Rul 4 i i i cl r9om t peii t tapettone i not ii s sed ts nt o e f t s ea he tton ha ii r s e il t r lel ntted o elt Dockets.Justia.com C 6 4 A)1 ; . u Ct R. 9a .Fial t ec n c c ne ha s rme isb fl gasae 5 ( ( ) Va S p. . 5:() n l h o vit a x u t e de y i tt y, n h b a p tto dr cl wi t Su rmeCo r o Vign a VA. DE j80 - 5 A)1. a e s eiin ie ty t he p e h u t f r ii. CO .1 6 4( () W hihe rr ei tke t c c uli t l m us pr s ntt cli st t Supr p eCour of c ve out s a n, he onvit tma ey t e e he am o he e t Vigi a a r eveanli fom t tco tbe or af de a dititc tca c i rt r ni nd ec i lng r ha ur f e e r l src our n onsde he cai s A ha aspeii rha no e use sa er medi i t pe ii rhast rghtl d lm . be ttone s t xha t d t t e es f he ttone he i m er sa e1w t r iet que ton pr s nt by a a lbl pr dtr a f ist do s 28U . C. t t a o as he si e e ed ny vaia e oce le nd al o o. S. j2254() c. Thepeii cla l s w st tPeii ne ha no pr s nt d c am st t Supr m eCour tton e ry ho ha tto r s t e e e l i o he e t ofVigi a.2 Petto rsf iur t e us saer medisma t sl a y dimi s loft r ni ii ne ' al e o xha t t t e e ndaes lmm r s s a he pe ii n.3 Based upon t indi t tPe ii rhasnotm a t r quiie s t tals wi tto he ng ha ttone de he e st ubsan i ho ng O d n a o ac n tt to a rg ta rq ie b 2 U. C. 2 3 a dSlc v Mc ne, 2 f e il f o siui n l ih s e ur d y 8 S. j 25 /) n a k . Da il 5 9 U. 4 , 4 ( 0 ) ac rii eo a S. 73 48 20 0 , e t f f Ex'x R :Thi l s lb l yi d ne . a ii s e id t l)I dyoMa 2017. ar y , / J -imu g ' r Gv#' Unie Stt sDititJ W t d a e src udge 2 Peii ralege i t peii t tcoms di notpurueadie ta alandhehasnotyetpr e e r c ppe , ttone l s n he tton ha t el d s es ntd t t tcl m t t Supr meCo tofVigi a. he ha ai o he e ur r ni 3Peii rma r iehi f r lha aspeii i heuns es f l p es st cai t t Supr ttone y efl s ede a be tton f ucc suly r ent he l ms o he eme Cour ofVigi at o oneoft t r r ut sdes i Peii i a s d,howeve ,t hi tmet fl sae t r ni hr ugh he h ee o e crbed. ttoner s dvie r hat s i o ie tt a dfd rl a e speio si l td S e28U. C. 2 4 ( VA. E j80 - 5 ( ()Va Su CtR. n e ea h b a tin s i e . e t mi S. j 2 4 *; COD .16 4A)2 , . p. . ' 59a. :()

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.