Harrell v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 3:2013cv00153 - Document 7 (E.D. Va. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 10/1/13. Copy sent: Yes(tdai, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division ROGER LEE HARRELL, Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 3:13CV153 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered the Court denied a petition under 28 U.S.C. Harrell challenging wearing counts a in 2006). U.S.C. § two Harrell On March 11, 2254 petition convictions ("March 11, restricted the second successive v. from of Virginia, 21, 2006 § 2254 by Roger Lee convictions counts 2013, July of burglary, robbery, and 3:05CV636 three (E.D. Va. the Court received another Harrell challenging the same of 1996 to hear 2013 Petition"). The Antiterrorism and or Virginia public, of abduction. July 21, 28 mask his on Effective jurisdiction of Death the applications Penalty Act district for federal courts habeas corpus relief by prisoners attacking the validity of their convictions and sentences by establishing a "gatekeeping mechanism." v. Turpin, omitted). 518 U.S. 651, Specifically, 657 (1996) x>[b]efore application permitted by this section (internal a second is filed Felker quotation or in marks successive the district court, the applicant shall move in the appropriate court appeals for an order authorizing the district court to the application." has not received the March 11, 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). authorization 2013 Petition, from the the consider Because the Court Fourth action of will Circuit be to file dismissed for want of jurisdiction. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a judge issues a certificate of appealability PCOA") . 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A COA will unless a prisoner makes "a substantial showing of a constitutional requirement is right." satisfied debate whether (or, should have issues presented been Harrell fails to only that resolved were proceed further.'" (quoting Barefoot for 28 when a ^adequate satisfy different 463 this U.S. the manner or could petition that encouragement 529 U.S. 880, This jurists that) deserve McDaniel, Estelle, § 2253(c)(2). agree to issue the denial of "reasonable matter, in Slack v. v. U.S.C. not 893 standard. 473, 484 & n.4 the to (2000) (1983)). Accordingly, a certificate of appealability will be denied. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion to Harrell. Date' (AH^M/,201% Richmond, Virginia ' Robert E. Payne Senior United States District Judge
]]>
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.
