Larry L. Wilson v. Steve Berry, 98 F.3d 1343 (6th Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
Larry L. Wilson v. Steve Berry, 98 F.3d 1343 (6th Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
21 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Luisa (ncwd, 2003-06-09)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Luisa
W.D.N.C. · 2003 · signal: accord · confidence high
Clark, supra (applying the statute to a defendant who pled guilty and then sought review of an order of detention pending sentencing); accord, United States v. Bowman, 98 F.3d 1343 (table), 1996 WL 571135 (6th Cir.1996) (“Release is no longer favored once guilt of a crime has been established.”); United States v. Green, 250 F.Supp.2d 1145 (E.D.Mo.2003) (Defendant taken into custody immediately upon entry of guilty plea); United States v. Vallie, 2001 WL 627432 , at *2 (D.N.D.2001) (“In fact, after a guilty plea or conviction of one of the enumerated crimes, there is a strong presumption …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Larry L. Wilson
v.
Steve Berry
95-6564.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Sep 30, 1996.
98 F.3d 1343
Unpublished

98 F.3d 1343

NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Larry L. WILSON, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Steve BERRY, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 95-6564.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Sept. 30, 1996.

1

Before: MARTIN and CONTIE, Circuit Judges; CARR, District Judge.[*]

ORDER

2

Larry L. Wilson, a pro se Kentucky prisoner, appeals a district court judgment dismissing, without prejudice, his petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

3

In 1993, a jury convicted Wilson of raping a twelve year old girl, and he was sentenced to eight years of imprisonment. Wilson's direct appeal was still pending in the Kentucky Court of Appeals at the time he filed his habeas petition.

4

Subsequent to the filing of his direct appeal, Wilson also filed a Ky.R.Crim.P. 11.42 motion in the Fayette Circuit Court, arguing that his trial counsel had rendered ineffective assistance. The Fayette Circuit Court denied petitioner's 11.42 motion on the merits. Thereafter, the Kentucky Court of Appeals held Wilson's appeal of the denial of his Rule 11.42 motion in abeyance pending a decision on the direct appeal of his conviction.

5

In his § 2254 petition, Wilson argued that counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Upon review, a magistrate judge filed a report recommending that the district court dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust available state court remedies. Over Wilson's objections, the district court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissed the petition without prejudice.

6

Wilson has filed a timely appeal, reasserting his same claim. The appellee has submitted a letter to the court indicating that it will not be filing a brief.

7

Upon review, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Wilson's petition for a writ of habeas corpus for the reasons stated in its memorandum opinion filed April 17, 1995. A review of the record reflects that Wilson had not exhausted available state court remedies when he filed his habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b), (c); Hannah v. Conley, 49 F.3d 1193, 1196 (6th Cir.1995) (per curiam).

8

Accordingly, we hereby affirm the district court's judgment. Rule 9(b)(3), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

*

The Honorable James G. Carr, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation