Saunders v. Department of Correctional, No. 7:2014cv00227 - Document 3 (W.D. Va. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Norman K. Moon on 05/06/2014. (kab)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION JAMAL KEMO SAUNDERS, Petitioner, v. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 7:14cv00227 MEMORANDUM OPINION By: Norman K. Moon United States District Judge Petitioner Jamal Kemo Saunders, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his convictions in the Danville Circuit Court. I find that Saunders did not fully exhaust his state court remedies before filing this federal habeas petition and, therefore, I will dismiss this action without prejudice. I. On January 16, 2014, the Danville Circuit Court convicted Saunders of malicious wounding, in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-51; possessing a firearm as a convicted felon, in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-308.2; and using a firearm to commit a felony, in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-53.1. The court sentenced Saunders to 16 years incarceration, with 5 years suspended. Saunders appealed to the Court of Appeals of Virginia and his appeal is still pending. Saunders has not yet appealed to the Supreme Court of Virginia or filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in any state court. II. A federal court cannot grant a habeas petition unless the petitioner has exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the state in which he was convicted. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973). If the petitioner has failed to exhaust state court remedies, the federal court must dismiss the petition. Slayton v. Smith, 404 U.S. 53 (1971). In Virginia, a non-death row felon ultimately must present his claims to the Supreme Court of Virginia and receive a ruling from that court, before a federal district court may consider his claims. See Va. Code § 8.01654. In this case, it is clear that Saunders has yet to pursue his instant claims in the Supreme Court of Virginia. Accordingly, I find that Saunders petition is unexhausted. III. Based on the foregoing, I will dismiss Saunders habeas petition, without prejudice, as unexhausted. ENTER: This 6th day of May, 2014.

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.