Jackson v. Stephens, No. 4:2014cv02548 - Document 10 (S.D. Tex. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 3 APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, dismissing without prejudice 1 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. A Certificate of Appealability is denied. (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified. (aboyd, 4)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Jackson v. Stephens Doc. 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION PERRY JACKSON, TDCJ NO. 1918186, § § § § § § § § § § § § § Petitioner, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-14-2548 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Perry Jackson (TDCJ No. 1918186) is a state inmate incarcerated in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice pursuant to a state court judgment. Jackson has filed a federal Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State Custody under 28 u.S.C. § 2254 (Docket Entry No.1) challenging a state court conviction while a state post-conviction application for a writ of habeas pending. corpus, challenging the same conviction, is currently For reasons explained more fully below, this case will be dismissed for failure to exhaust state court remedies. I. Procedural History Jackson is serving a thee-year prison sentence pursuant to a state court conviction for failure to comply with sex offender reporting requirements. State v. Jackson, No. 1351485 (178th Dist. Dockets.Justia.com Ct., Harris County, Tex., March 14, He states that he 2014). entered a guilty plea to the trial court and did not file a notice of appeal. (Docket Entry No.1, p. 3) Jackson states that he filed a state application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure on June 13, 2014, and it was denied by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on August 20, 2014. rd. at 4. He states that he filed a second state habeas application and that it is still pending. II. rd. at 4. Analysis The court verified with the Harris County District Clerk's Office that conviction. no direct appeal was filed challenging Jackson's See Harris County District Clerk Website http://www. hcdistrictclerk.com. The Texas Court of Appeals records reflect that a state application for a writ of habeas corpus was filed with the district court and was denied by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on August 20, 2014. See Website for Texas Court of Criminal Appeals: http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/. Harris County District Clerk's records reflect that a second state habeas application was filed on August 11, 2014, and was forwarded to the Court of Criminal Appeals on October 1, 2014. See Website for Harris County Clerk's Office. Under 28 U.S.C. available courts. state § 2254(b) a habeas petitioner must exhaust remedies before See Nobles v. Johnson, seeking relief 127 F.3d 409, -2 - in the 419-420 federal (5th Cir. See also Wion v. Quarterman, 567 F.3d 146, 148 (5th Cir. 1997) 2009) ("Before pursuing federal habeas relief, a petitioner is required to exhaust all state procedures for relief.) v. Cain, 228 F.3d 616, 619-20 (5th Cir. 2000)). (citing Orman To exhaust his state remedies the petitioner must fairly present the substance of his claims to the state courts, and the claims must have been fairly presented to the highest court of the state. 420, citing Picard v. Connor, 92 S. Ct. 509, 512-13 v. Collins, 919 F.2d 1074, 1076 (5th Cir. 1990). requirement is based on the precept Thompson, 111 S. Ct. 2546, 2555 (1991). of Nobles, (1971) i at Myers This exhaustion comity. Coleman v. Federal courts follow this principle to afford the state courts the first opportunity "to address and correct alleged violations of state prisoner's federal rights." his Id. state Therefore, a habeas petitioner must pursue all of court remedies before claims in a federal petition. presenting See Rhines v. his constitutional Weber, 128 S. Ct. 1528, 1533 (2005). This court should not adjudicate a federal writ application while habeas claims are under review by the state courts. Deters v. Collins, 985 F.2d 789, 797 (5th Cir. 1993) See ("Because Deters' state appeal is still pending, we would have to ignore the doctrine of federal-state comity by disrupting that ongoing state process. ") Cir. 1972) i see also Williams v. Bailey, 463 F. 2d 247, 248 (5th ("federal disruption of the state judicial appellate -3- process would be an unseemly and uncalled for interference that comity between our dual system forbids"). the state courts circumvent the issue state a decision. system and He Jackson must wait until cannot seek relief be in allowed federal to court without allowing the state courts an opportunity to rule on his claims. See Graham v. Collins, 94 F.3d 958, 969 (5th Cir. 1996); Deters, 985 F.2d at 792-794. 560, 561 (5th Cir. 1972). See also Bryant v. Bailey, 464 F.2d If a federal habeas petition is filed while state remedies ,are still being pursued, the federal court has the authority to dismiss the federal petition. 139 F.3d 491, 493 (5th Cir. 1998). Brewer v. Johnson, Moreover, if a habeas petition contains both exhausted and unexhausted claims, it is a "mixed" petition, which should be dismissed without prejudice. v. Johnson, 163 F.3d 906, 908 (5th Cir. 1998), Alexander citing Rose v. Lundy, 102 S. Ct. 1198 (1982). Accordingly, this action will be dismissed without prejudice for failure of the petitioner to exhaust all available remedies on all his claims to the state's highest court of jurisdiction as required by the provisions of 28 U.S.C. criminal § 2254. Should Jackson file a notice of appeal, the court denies the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability for the reasons stated in this Memorandum Opinion and Order. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Whitehead v. Johnson, 157 F.3d 384, 386 (5th Cir. 199$); Murphy v. Johnson, 110 F.3d 10, 11 (5th Cir. 1997). -4 - i : III. Conclusion 1. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corp\.1s By a Person in State Custody (Docket Entry No.1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for petitioner's failure to exhaust state court remedies. 2. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. 3. The Application to Proceed In (Docket Entry No.3) is GRANTED. 4. The Clerk will provide a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to the petitioner and will provide a copy of the Petition and this Memorandum to the respondent and the attorney general by providing one copy to the Attorney General of the State of Texas. Forma Pauperis SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this 6th day of October, 2014. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -5- ~
]]>
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.
