Newkirk v. Director, Dept. of Corrections, No. 3:2015cv00172 - Document 2 (E.D. Va. 2015)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 4/9/2015. (sbea, )

Download PDF
Newkirk v. Director, Dept. of Corrections Doc. 2 1? b Richmond Division L APR 1 0 2015 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA II Vj CLERK, U.S. niSTRICT COURT RiCH.'.ionn, VA KENNETH NEWKIRK, Petitioner, Civil Action No. 3:15CV172-HEH V. DIRECTOR, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dismissing Without Prejudice 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition) Kenneth Newkirk, a Virginia state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("§ 2254 Petition"). By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on September 9, 2013 (ECF Nos. 6, 7), the Court dismissed an earlier 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition filed by Newkirk for failure to exhaust his state court remedies. See Newkirk v. Lerner, No. 3; 13CV570-HEH, 2013 WL 4811219, at 1 (E.D. Va. Sept. 9, 2013) {""Newkirk/"). The Order in Newkirk I informed Newkirk: Before the Court will consider any future habeas petition fi-om Newkirk, he must explain how he has exhausted his state court remedies. Accordingly, Newkirk must attach to the front of any future petition the following statement: "I have pursued all of my state court remedies for the claims and convictions described herein." Failure to comply with this directive will result in summary dismissal of the action. Newkirk / at * 1. Dockets.Justia.com Newkirk's current § 2254 Petition fails to comply with the Court's Order.' Accordingly, the action will be dismissed without prejudice. A certificate of appealability will be denied. An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion. A Date:A»rSl \2otS Henry E. Hudson United States District Judge Richmond, Virginia ' Moreover, Newkirk's current habeas petition states that hisdirect appeal is pending in the Court of Appeals of Virginia. (§ 2254 Pet. at 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.