Johnson v. Pearson, No. 3:2013cv00284 - Document 17 (E.D. Va. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 08/12/2014. Copy mailed to Petitioner. (walk, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA E ET I AUG I 2 2014 Richmond Division l^\ M CLERK, U.S. DISfRICTCOURT RICHMOND VA NORMAN T. JOHNSON, Petitioner, Civil Action No. 3:13cv284-HEH EDDIE PEARSON, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Granting Respondent's Motion to Dismiss) Norman T. Johnson, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and informa pauperis, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("§ 2254 Petition"). Respondent moves to dismiss the § 2254 Petition. Johnson has responded. The matter is ripe for disposition. In his § 2254 Petition, Johnson argues entitlement to relief upon the following grounds:1 Claim 1(A)(1) The Circuit Court violated Johnson's due process2 rights by accepting his guilty plea because the Circuit Court erred in conducting an inadequate plea colloquy. Claim 1(A)(2) The Circuit Court erred by allowing him to plead guilty to robbery of a residence instead of bank robbery. 1On his §2254 Petition form, Johnson labels his Claims as One through Four, however, in his attachment that provides the supporting argument for the claims, he uses a different, somewhat confusing numbering system consistent with his state petition. For ease of reference, the Court employs the numbering Johnson uses in the attachment to his § 2254 Petition for each claim. "No State shall... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...." U.S. Const, amend. XIV, § 1. '
]]>
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.
