Satchell v. Detective Verbena et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 2/1/2018. Copy to Pro Se Petitioner. (jsmi, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division

ALPHONSO SATCHELL,

Petitioner,
V.

Civil Action No. 3:17CV705

DETECTIVE VERBENA, et al.,

Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Petitioner, a Virginia prisoner proceeding pro se, submitted a document

complaining about his arrest.

(EOF No. 1.) Given the content of this document, the

Court found it was appropriate to give Petitioner the opportunity to pursue this action as a

petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See Rivenbark v. Virginia,
305 F. App'x 144, 145 (4th Cir. 2008).

By Memorandum Order entered on November 30, 2017, the Court directed
Petitioner, within twenty (20) days of the date of entry thereof, to complete and return the
standardized form for filing a § 2254 petition if he wished to file a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus. The Court warned Petitioner that the failure to comply with the terms of
the November 30, 2017 Memorandum Order would result in the dismissal of the action.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

More than twenty (20) days have elapsed and Petitioner has not completed and

returned the § 2254 form.

Instead, Petitioner submitted a letter wherein Petitioner

acknowledges that he has yet to be sentenced on his state charges and asks if he should

wait until after he is sentenced to file the § 2254 Petition. Petitioner is correct that he

cannot file a § 2254 petition until he exhausts all of his state court remedies.

Accordingly,

the action will be dismissed without prejudice.

A certificate of

appealability will be denied.

An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion

/S/
Date:

Richmond, Virginia

JohnA.Gibney, Jr. /
United States District M [e