Unger v. Whitley, No. 7:2015cv00592 - Document 19 (W.D. Va. 2016)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Jackson L. Kiser on 2/9/2016. (slt)

Download PDF

CL ERK' oFFl ua Dl COURT S ce s. sT. AT DANVI E, LL VA FI LED I TH E UNI N TED STATES DI STRI COURT CT FO R TH E W ESTER N D I STR I O F VI G I A CT R NI ROANOKE DI I ON V SI ROB A. ERT UNGER, Pe ii r tt one , V. JAM E W H I TLEY , Res pondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FEB 28 2 1 26 J UL C. LE CLE K D X B : pt CLERK v EPUTY CiiAcinNo 71-v05 i vl to . :5c-0 9 M EM O R AN DU M O PI NION By: Hon. ks L.K ie Jac on sr Se orUnie St e Dit i tJudge ni t d at s sr c Ro r A .U nge ,a V i g ni pr t i de a neepr ee ng pr K , ie a pe ii f a w rt be t r r i a e ral t i oc di o fld tton or i . ofhabe sc us c pl ni t ther a om , om ai ng ha emai i a ce a e be or t r ol ton ofape ng ns nc r r t d f e he es u i ndi c i i m a t ri s a e c t1 A f d a cour w ilonl i r i o a s a e co ts rm nal te n t t our . t l y nqui e nt t t ur ' e er l dee na i ofbai whe t de e mi ton i a bir r ordic i i t y orr s t i t de a tnni ton l n he t r nai s r ta y s rm na or e uls n he nil ofc e orafi til Masra v. dma 326F. 7 71 1( hCi.1 64) W a l v. ouns l ar ra. tin He n, 2d 08, 0-1 8t r 9 ; nsey W ikes 263F.Supp.5 5 5 ( . Va.1 .tfhepur eofrquii abo i t l ron, 4, 6-7 W D. 967) s' pos e rng nd s o a s r tep e e c o t ed fn a ta t etil ft tilud era o a yb le e t t su e h r s n e f h e e d n t h ra.l he ra j g e s n bl eiv s ha r ga dls oft a ounts tt a c e wilbeunlkel t bepr e a ti ,hem a de bai e r e s he m e he c us d l i y o es nt t ral y ny l c mpltl Alo atil u g mu td n b i i h festerla eo t a c s dwi e d n e o eey. s , ra j d e s e y alf e e l h ee s f he c u e l n a g r l t s eyoft c he aft he ommuniy. W a lv,s pr a 57(ntr cttonsomit . t ' nse u a t i enal iai ' ted) Pe ii ttonerf ist e tbls t tt denilofbalwasa bir y o dic i i t r o a l o sa ih ha he a i r tar r s rm na o y r r s t i t de alofc ns ora f rti l Furhe m or ,a e e r di r c r um s a s e uled n he ni ou el ai r a . t r e bs nt xtaor na y ic t nce , f r c t m us no i e f r wih pe ng s a e c i i lpr e ngs See e. ,Younce v. ede al our s t t nt r e e t ndi t t rm na oc edi . . g. r Unger v. Whitley Doc. 19 Hars 401U. 37,44( 971 ; r a rv. adly,1 U. 1 1 70( 898) Tayl v. ri, S. 1 ) Hakr de W e 72 S. 48, 69- 1 ; or Tant ,83U. 366,3 ( ) Fe a dititc t s da ti fom c tt i i or S. 70 1873 . derl src ours houl bsan r onsiutonal lPe iine ' m uli eflngsi t saci r alt tPeiine a tto rs tpl ii n hi ton eve ha tto r ppeal hi convi i i t Ciyof ed s cton n he t W i se Ge r DititCour f publci oxia i t t CiyofW i nche tr neal src t or i nt c ton o he t nchese Cicui Cour a heha no ye tr r t q nd s t t be r ti Ac di y,lconsr t peii a agui f ar ea eonbo pe ng r ol in oft sae en ered. cor ngl tue he tton s r ng or el s nd ndi es uto he tt ci i c r rm nal ha ge. Dockets.Justia.com c aln e t saej d ca p o e dn s rg r e so acam' me is it ef d rlcamsc ul h l g s o tt u iil r c e ig , e adls f li s rt,f h e ea li o d e b p e e tdi teo g i gsaej dca p o e dn .Cie Bl eo Ch ro t. n . e r sn e n h n o n tt u iil r c e ig n ma u f al t I c v. e Gic it 887F. 49,52- ( hCi.1 .Clal Peii rmayprs nthi fdealcams lhrs, 2d 53 4t r 989) e ry, ttone e e s e r li t sat c lsdurng ti l a o t e ou' t i ra , ppea s a c l tr pr ee ngs Se Bonnerv.Cicui Cou tof l, nd olae al oc di . e r t r StLoui,5 F. 1 ,1 ( t Ci.1 ( ba (fongr sa t fdealc t ha . s 26 2d 331 336 8h r 975) 0 nc) ç es nd he e r ours ve c itnty r ogni d t tf der lcourss d pe mi sa ec t t ty sa eca e ,a t t ons se l ec ze ha e a t houl r t t t ours o r tt s s nd ha , wh r c n ttto a is e aie saec u tu g saef l c mp tn t h n l te s b e t o ee o si in ls u s rs , tt o rj d e r ul o ee t o a d e h m u j c t u y Su rmeCo r rviw. M o e v r t eAnilj n to Ac, 8U. C. 2 8 , x r sl pe ute e ' ). ro e ,h t-n u ci n t 2 S. j 2 3 e p e sy p o i i ac u t r m e j ii gsaeci n l r c e i g , n 1lc u id ci nt g a t r h bt o r fo n on n tt rmia p o e d n s a d a kj rs ito o rn s m a m usr i f a i ts a e of i a sors a e a nc es ure v.Supe i Cour of nda ele ga ns t t fci l t t ge i .G l v r or t M e klnbur Cnt ,411F. 586,587( hCi.1 . c e g y. 2d 4t r 969) Ac odigy,h p tto i d s se wi o tp eu ie p ru n t Ru e 1b a d4o c r n l t e ei n s imisd t u rj d c , u s a t o ls ( ) n f i h t RulsGove ni j225 Cas s bec us i pl nl a asfom t peii t tPeii ri he e r ng 4 e , a e t ai y ppe r r he tton ha ttone s note ild t r i . Ba e upon my fndi t tPeii ntte o elef s d i ng ha ttonerha no m a t r quiie s t de he e st s tnta s ngofade a ofac tt i rghta r quie by28U. C.j2253 ,a ubsa il howi nil onsiutonal i s e rd S. /) c r ii t ofa al biiy i de e e tfca e ppe a lt s ni d. Ex r sR :Thi s dYkdyolbzy2016. l a rr na e r , . h e Z ni U nie St t s Di t i tJ e or t d a e s rc udg

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.