Newkirk v. Director, Dept. of Corrections

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 5/26/2017. (sbea, )

IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division
KENNETH NEWKIRK,
Petitioner,

v.
DIRECTOR, DEPT. OF
CORRECTIONS,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

~

u IL

l~

MAY 2 6 211

~

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURl
RICHMOND. VA

Civil Action No. 3: l 7CV229-HEH

MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Dismissing Without Prejudice 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition)
Kenneth Newkirk, a Virginia state prisoner proceedingpro se, filed a petition
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("§ 2254 Petition"). By Memorandum Opinion and Order
entered on September 9, 2013, the Court dismissed another 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition
filed by Newkirk for failure to exhaust his state court remedies. See Newkirk v. Lerner,

("Newkirk I"), No. 3: 13CV570-HEH, 2013 WL 4811219, at *I (E.D. Va. Sept. 9, 2013).
The Order in Newkirk I informed Newkirk:
Before the Court will consider any future habeas petition from Newkirk, he must
explain how he has exhausted his state court remedies. Accordingly, Newkirk
must attach to the front of any future petition the following statement:
"I have pursued all of my state court remedies for the claims and convictions
described herein." Failure to comply with this directive will result in summary
dismissal of the action.

Newkirk I, (ECF No. 7) I. Newkirk's current§ 2254 Petition fails to comply with the

above requirement. Accordingly, the action will be dismissed without prejudice. A
certificate of appealability will be denied.
An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

~
Isl
HENRY E. HUDSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Al) A - - ""OI?
Rich~a

Date:

2