Richardson v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 3:2015cv00380 - Document 2 (E.D. Va. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 8/4/15. (Copy mailed to Richardson).(jtho, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Richardson v. Commonwealth of Virginia Doc. 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division GREGORY RICHARDSON, Petitioner, V. Civil Action No. 3:15CV380 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION Gregory Richardson, submitted amassed this an action See No. at 3:07CV514, Richardson's under extensive litigation. a Virginia prisoner proceeding pro se, 28 U.S.C. history litigation (E.D. in 2254. Richardson of frivolous v. Richardson 1-7 § Va. Va. this Dec. and Dep't of 9, is subject abusive Corr., 2008). district has Thus, to the following pre-filing injunction: 1. only Absent a bona fide emergency, the Court will process one action at a time from Richardson If .... Richardson files a new action while another action is pending before the Court, the new action will be filed and summarily dismissed without prejudice. If an action is transferred or removed to this Court while another action is currently pending before the Court, the new action will summarily dismissed without prejudice. dismiss a pending action to expedite be filed and Richardson may another action that he wishes the Court to consider. Such dismissal, however, will be with prejudice if a responsive pleading or motion has been filed. 2. Richardson may not simultaneously litigate multiple challenges to his current custody in state and federal courtsU.S.C. § 2254(b) (1) (A) . See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b); 28 Dockets.Justia.com 3. Richardson is precluded from writing on both sides of any submission. 4. All petitions for writs of habeas corpus and civil rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 must be submitted on the standardized forms, which may be obtained from the Clerk of Court. To the extent that Richardson wishes to pursue an action under some other statute than 28 U.S.C. § 2241, 28 U.S.C § 2254, or 42 U.S.C. § 1983, he must identify the statute that authorizes the action at top of the first page of the action and succinctly explain why that statute is applicable. 5. In order to monitor Richardson's repetitious and multiplicitious litigation he must attach to each new complaint or petition a separate document entitled "motion for leave compliance" to which file shall and in certificate separately of number paragraphs: (a) Identify by style, date filed, and current status, all cases filed by him or in which he has been a plaintiff or petitioner within the one year period preceding the filing of the certificate. Richardson shall also identify in which court the case was filed; (b) Certify that the claims he wishes to present are new claims never before raised and dismissed with prejudice by any federal court and set forth why each claim could not have been raised in one of his prior federal actions; (c) For any complaint, set forth in separate subparagraphs for each of the defendants the facts relief his that Richardson believes against belief the that defendant such entitle him and facts the basis exist. to for Each subparagraph must, standing alone and without reference to other subparagraphs, exhibits, or attachments, establish that the claim against the defendant is made in good faith, and has a tenable basis in fact and is not frivolous; (d) penalty Contain of Richardson's perjury that the statement statements under made in the certificate of compliance are true. 6. Richardson's failure to comply strictly with the requirements set forth above will result in summary denial of the motion for leave to file. If Richardson misrepresents any facts he will be subject to appropriate sanctions. Richardson v. Va. Jan. 8, Va. Dep't of Corr., No. 3:07CV514, at 1-3 (E.D. 2009). Richardson's newest filing fails to strictly comply the requirements set forth in the pre-filing injunction. with First, Richardson's certificate indicates that he currently has pending state litigation challenging his purportedly unlawful detention. The injunction explicitly prohibited the simultaneous litigation of "multiples challenges 8, 2009). that his current Richardson, federal courts." to No. 3:07CV514, Richardson also fails his "motion for shall be compliance" paragraphs. Id. style, date filed, within the last leave to file year. in Richardson and current status, Id. that his statements made Accordingly, without The Court Va. and Jan. certificate separately to all cases Richardson's compliance are true. prejudice. and fails compliance wholly failed to contain a perjury state (E.D. at 2 in to comply with the requirement organized Next, custody of numbered "[i]dentify by filed by him" certificate of statement under penalty of within the certificate of the action will be dismissed will deny a certificate of appealability. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion to Richardson. It Date: is <0 so ORDERED. r ^,2^/S' / Richmond, ij^rginia Robert E. — Payne Senior United States District Judge 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.
