United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division
August 12, 2014
JAMES R. INGRAM, Petitioner,
HAROLD W. CLARK, ET AL, Respondents.
GLEN E. CONRAD, Chief District Judge.
James R. Ingram, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the 2003 judgment of the Circuit Court for the City of Roanoke under which he stands convicted of inanimate object penetration and sentenced to 40 years in prison. The court finds that the petition must be summarily dismissed as successive, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).
Court records indicate that Ingram previously filed a § 2254 petition concerning the same conviction, Ingram v. Department of Corrections, Case No. 7:05CV00334 (W.D. Va. Oct. 20, 2005). The court construes Ingram's current petition as alleging that the prosecution failed to seize and test the victim's clothing items and a towel purportedly used to clean her after the crime and used scare tactics to coerce Ingram into pleading guilty. The facts necessary for these claims were readily available to Ingram at the time of trial and at the time he filed his prior § 2254 petition, and he fails to point to any defect in the prior § 2254 proceedings. Thus, Ingram's current petition is a subsequent one, falling under the prohibition in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) against a second or successive petition.
Pursuant to § 2244(b), a federal district court may consider a second or successive § 2254 petition only if petitioner secures specific certification from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that the claims in the petition meet certain criteria. § 2244(b)(3). Because Ingram does not demonstrate that he has obtained such certification by the Court of Appeals, the court will dismiss the petition without prejudice as successive. An appropriate order will enter this day.
The Clerk is directed to send copies of this memorandum opinion and accompanying order to petitioner.