Saunders v. Commonweath of Virginia, No. 7:2014cv00395 - Document 3 (W.D. Va. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Michael F. Urbanski on 10/14/2014. (tvt)

Download PDF
Saunders v. Commonweath of Virginia Doc. 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION EDWARD GERMAIN SAUNDERS, JR., ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, ) Respondent. ) Civil Action No. 7:14cv00395 MEMORANDUM OPINION By: Michael F. Urbanski United States District Judge Petitioner Edward Germaine Saunders, Jr., 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 Roanoke City Circuit Court on the basis that counsel provided ineffective assistance. The court finds that Saunders did not fully exhaust his state court remedies before filing this federal habeas petition and, therefore, will dismiss this action without prejudice. I. On January 19, 2012, the Roanoke City Circuit Court convicted Saunders of abduction with the intent to defile, in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-48 and sentenced Saunders to 45 years incarceration, with 44 years and 5 months suspended. Saunders appealed and the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of Virginia denied his appeals. While his appeals were pending, Saunders also filed a motion to withdraw his plea in the Roanoke City Circuit Court, which the court denied on February 8, 2012. Saunders has not yet filed a petition for writ of habeas. 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 Dockets.Justia.com 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 ineffective assistance of counsel claims in the Supreme Court of Virginia. Accordingly, the court finds that Saunders petition is unexhausted. III. Based on the foregoing, I will dismiss Saunders habeas petition, without prejudice, as unexhausted. Entered: October 14, 2014 Michael F. Urbanski Michael F. Urbanski 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.