Saunders v. Dep't of Corr.

Full title: JAMAL KEMO SAUNDERS, Petitioner, v. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION

Date published: May 6, 2014

Civil Action No. 7:14cv00227 (W.D. Va. May. 6, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 7:14cv00227

05-06-2014

JAMAL KEMO SAUNDERS, Petitioner, v. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.

NORMAN K. MOON

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 § 8.01-654. 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.

__________

NORMAN K. MOON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE