Akil Bey v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 13-7759 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7759 AKIL RASHIDI BEY, ex rel. Aikido Graves, Petitioner - Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; DETENTION CENTER, PRINCE WILLIAM-MANASSAS ADULT Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-01001-TSE-TCB) Submitted: April 8, 2014 Decided: April 29, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Akil Rashidi Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Akil Rashidi Bey seeks to appeal the district court s October 9, 2013, order dismissing U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. without prejudice his 28 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). After reviewing Bey s handwritten petition, the district court issued an order on September 26, 2013, directing Bey to submit an amended petition and either pay the filing fee or apply to proceed in forma pauperis. The order also warned Bey of the consequences of failing to comply with the court s order. Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 95-96 (1989). See When that order was returned as undeliverable, the district court concluded that Bey failed to notify it of a change of address, failed to comply with its September 26 order, and dismissed the action without prejudice. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the court s September 26 order was mailed to an incorrect address, the origins of which are not known. that Bey should be given an We conclude, therefore, opportunity to comply with the court s order and pursue in a § 2254 proceeding those claims that, but for the district court s addressing error, could have been further developed before the district court. Accordingly, we grant Bey leave to proceed in forma pauperis, vacate the October 9 dismissal order, and remand the action for further 2 proceedings. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. VACATED AND REMANDED 3
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.
