Hill v. Unknown, No. 7:2019cv00186 - Document 5 (W.D. Va. 2019)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Senior Judge Jackson L. Kiser on 4/9/2019. (slt)
Download PDF
# CLERK'S OFFICE U.S.DI:T.COURT . AT DANVILLE,VA FILED IN TH E UN ITED STA TES DISTR IC T C O UR T FO R TH E W ESTER N DISTRIC T O F W R G IN IA R O A N O K E D IV ISIO N JEREM IAH R Y AN H ILL , Petitioner, UNU OW N, R espondent. APR 99 2919 JUL .D DLEXCLQRK 5Y: DEPUTY CLER ) CASE NO.7:19CV00186 ) ) ) M EM ORANDUM OPINION ) ) By:Hon.JacksonL.Kiser ) SeniorUnitedStatesDistrictJudge ) Jerem iah Ryan Hill,a Virginia inmate proceeding pro K ,filed thispetition fora writof habeascorpus,ptlrsuantto28U.S.C.j2254. Hechallengesthe2018judgmentoftheGrayson Cotmty CircuitCourttmderwhich he standsconvicted ofassaultand battery and strangulation. Upon review of the record,1 conclude thatthe petition mustbe summarily dismissed without prejudiceforfailuretoexhauststatecourtremedies. Under 28 U.S.C.j 2254(19,a federalcourtcannotgrant a habeas petition tmlessthe petitionerhasexhausted therem ediesavailable in thecourtsofthe state in which hew asconvicted. Theexhaustion requirementissatisfied by seeking review oftheclaim s,tluoughoutthestatecourt system,to the higheststate courtwith jurisdiction to considerthe claims. See O'Sullivan v. Boerckel,526 U.S.838,845(1999).Astoclaimsthatgenerally carmotbeaddressedon direct appeal,such asclaim sofineffectiveassistance oftrialcotm sel,the petitioner'sstate courtrem edies inVirginiaincludefiling astatehabeaspetition intheCircuitCourtwherehewasconvicted,with Hill v. Unknown Doc. 5 an appealofan adverse decision to the Supreme CourtofVirginia. Va.Code Ann.j 8.01- 654(A)(1);j 17.1-406(B).In thealtemative,hecan 5leastatehabeaspetition directlywith the SupremeCou. l' tofVirginia. Va.Code Ann.j8.01-654(A)(1). W hichevezroutehefollowsin exhausting state courtrem edies,a petitionermustultim ately presenthis claims to the Suprem e Dockets.Justia.com Cout'tofVirginia and receive aruling from thatcourtbefore afederaldistrictcourtcan consider them onthemeritsunderj2254. ln thisj2254 petition,Hillallegesthathistrialattomey failed tofile anoticeofappeal afterHillasked him to doso andthatsubsequentattorneysdidnotassisthim inobtainingabelated appeal. Hillindicates on hispetition thathe did notappeal. He states thathe did file a postconviction m otion in the trialcourtabouthisattorney's alleged failings,butitwasdenied. Hill doesnotindicatethathehaseverfiled apetition forawritofhabeascorpusin any statecourt,and state courtrecords available online do not indicate that he has done so. B ecause these records indicate thatHillhasnotpresented hiscurrentclaim sto any statecourtin a petition forawritof habeas cop us,the appropriate legalvehicle by wllich he m ay ordinarily do so,he hasnotyet exhaustedavailablestatecourtremediesasrequiredunderj2254(b).Therefore,Imustdismiss hisj2254petition withoutprejudicetoallow him torettmltostatecourttodoso.l SeeSlavton v.Smith,404U.S.53,54 (1971)(findingthatj2254habeaspetitionmustbedismissedwithout prejudiceifpetitionerhasnotpresentedllisclaimstotheappropriatestatecourtand couldstilldo so).Anappropriateorderwillissuethisday. TheClerk isdirectedto sendcopiesofthism emorandtlm opinion and accompanying order to petitioner. Exlxlum thi 4k s 9 dayofApril,2019. N . E f R UNITED STATES DISTM CT RJD GE ' Hillisadvised thatthe tim e to file a state courthabeaspetition is limited,such thathe should promptly pursue any such rem edy. lfhe isdissatisfied with the outcom e afterexhausting available state courtremedies,hemay fileanotherj2254 petition inthiscourtatthattime. W hileproperly filed state courthabeascorpusproceedingsare pending,thetimelimitto fileaj2254petitionwillbepaused (also known astolled).See28U.S.C.j2254(d)(2). 2