Hines v. Clarke

Docket 2:20-cv-00522

Filed
2020-10-19
Terminated
2022-08-15
Case type
cv

Outcome

other judgment · defendant

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=22 OFFICE=2 DOCKET=2000522 FILEDATE=10/19/2020 DISP=17, PROCPROG=2, JUDGMENT=2; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division DWAYNE DOMINIC HINES, Petitioner, v. ACTION NO. 2:20-cev-522 HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent. FINAL ORDER Before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and the Respondent’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 18. On September 8, 2016, the Petitioner was convicted of second degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony in the Petersburg Circuit Court. Petitioner was sentenced to twenty years on the murder conviction and three years for the firearm conviction. In his petition, the pro se Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of this conviction and sentence. The matter was referred for disposition to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B)-(C), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), Local Civil Rule 72, and the April 2, 2002 Standing Order on Assignment of Certain Matters to United States Magistrate Judges. In a Report and Recommendation entered on July 15, 2022, ECF No. 26, the Magistrate Judge recommended the motion to dismiss be granted, and the petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice. The parties were advised of their right to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation. Neither the Petitioner nor the Respondent filed objections with the Court. Having reviewed the record and having heard no objection, the Court agrees with the Report and Recommendation on the grounds stated by the Magistrate Judge and ADOPTS and APPROVES the Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 26, in its entirety as the Court’s own | opinion. Accordingly, the Respondent’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 18, is GRANTED, and the Petition, ECF No. 1, is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is ORDERED that judgment be entered in favor of the Respondent. The Petitioner is hereby notified that he may appeal from the judgment entered pursuant to this Final Order by filing a written notice of appeal with the Clerk of the Court at the Walter E. Hoffman United States Courthouse, 600 Granby Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510, within thirty (30) days from the date judgment is entered. Because the Petitioner has failed to demonstrate a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b)(1), the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. See Miller-El v, Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003). The Clerk is DIRECTED to forward a copy of this Order to the Petitioner and counsel of record for the Respondent. It is so ORDERED. . ZN ! Ly ‘Get Where Robert G. Doumar United States District Judge Norfolk, Virginia Date: Avy. 15, ZO%L ;

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.