Lam v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Filing
3
OPINION. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 11/4/2015. (tvt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
ETHAN T. LAM,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 7:15CV00587
OPINION
By: James P. Jones
United States District Judge
Ethan T. Lam, Pro Se Petitioner.
Petitioner Ethan T. Lam, proceeding pro se, filed this action as a petition for
a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Upon review of the record, I
conclude that the petition must be summarily dismissed without prejudice for
failure to exhaust state court remedies.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b), 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. The exhaustion requirement is satisfied by seeking
review of the claims in the state court system, through direct appeal or habeas
corpus proceedings, and ultimately presenting the claims to the highest state court
with jurisdiction to consider them. See O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 845
(1999).
If a § 2254 petitioner has not presented his habeas claims to the
appropriate state court and could still do so, a federal court should dismiss his
petition without prejudice. See Slayton v. Smith, 404 U.S. 53, 54 (1971).
Lam is challenging the July 2014 judgment of the Rockingham County
Circuit Court under which he stands convicted of a misdemeanor count of
distribution of marijuana. Lam states that he was sentenced on July 21, 2014, to
one year in jail, suspended, and two years of probation. He did not appeal. In
September 2015, his probation was revoked, and he was sentenced to serve 90 days
in jail, with an additional year added to his term of probation.
On October 21, 2015, Lam signed his notarized § 2254 petition. He alleges
arrest without probable cause, insufficient evidence to convict, and ineffective
assistance of counsel. Neither the petition nor state court records online indicate
that Lam has filed a state court habeas corpus petition presenting his current claims
to the circuit court or to the Supreme Court of Virginia. Until he has given the
Supreme Court of Virginia an opportunity to address these claims, he has not
exhausted state court remedies as required under § 2254(b). Therefore, I must
dismiss the petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies.
A separate Final Order will be entered herewith.
DATED: November 4, 2015
/s/ James P. Jones
United States District Judge
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?