Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dingle v. Director, Va. Department of Corrections

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division

April 28, 2017

Lamarr Barthell Dingle, Petitioner,
v.
Director, Va. Department of Corrections, Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Gerald Bruce Lee United States District Judge.

         This Matter comes before the Court on respondent's Renewed Motion to Dismiss a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 filed by Lamarr Barthell Dingle, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se. Dingle challenges the constitutionality of convictions entered in the Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk.

         I. Background

         On May 16, 2013, following a bench trial, petitioner was convicted of attempted murder and aggravated malicious wounding. He received a sentence of 35 years incarceration, with 25 years suspended. Case Nos. CR12001741-00 - 01.

         Dingle appealed his convictions, arguing that: (1) the trial judge erred when she stated that it was irrelevant whether or not the victim had broken into petitioner's house; and (2) the trial court erred by refusing to allow him to testify about his educational and employment backgrounds. The Court of Appeals denied the petition for appeal on December 17, 2013. Dingle v. Commonwealth. R. No. 1329-13-1 (Va. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013). The Supreme Court of Virginia refused a petition for further review on August 15, 2014. Dingle v. Commonwealth. R. No. 140120 (Va. Aug. 14, 2014). Dingle's petition for a writ of certiorari was denied by the United States Supreme Court on June 1, 2015. Dingle v. Va., Case No. 14-9098.

         Dingle next filed a petition for a state writ of habeas corpus in the Supreme Court of Virginia in which he advanced the following arguments:

         A. Exclusion of evidence and witnesses:

1. The doctor was not present at trial to testify as a medical expert.
2. The medical records do not match the victim's testimony at any of the court proceedings.
3. The judge did not consider or weigh all the evidence.
4. The victim is not a medical expert and her testimony was inadmissible at trial.
5. The judge did not allow all the evidence to be admitted at trial.
6. The medical records were not presented as part of the exhibits or as exculpatory evidence at the trial.
7. His rights to due process and a fair trial were violated when the doctor was not subpoenaed as a witness at trial.

         B. He received ineffective assistance of counsel for the following reasons:

1. Counsel's performance fell below the standard of reasonableness and the outcome of the trial would have been different if counsel had performed effectively.
2. Counsel failed to investigate favorable medical reports and did not secure or present the testimony of the victim's treating physician at trial.
3. Counsel failed to investigate the facts and circumstances and failed to object to evidence presented ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.