United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
Roderick C. Young, United States Magistrate Judge.
Dexter Cain, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and
in forma pauperis, filed this petition for a writ of
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("§ 2254
Petition, " ECF No. 1) challenging, inter alia,
the revocation of his parole. Cain argues entitlement to relief
upon the following grounds:"
Claim One: In revoking Cain's parole, the Virginia Parole
Board ("VPB") failed to provide the minimum process
required by the Supreme Court in Morrissey v.
Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972). (§ 2254 Pet. 13.)
Claim Two: Cain's rights were violated when the VPB
revoked Cain's 17 years, 11 months, and 4 days of good
conduct time without affording Cain any due process.
Claim Three: The Commonwealth breached a verbal agreement
made to Cain not to revoke his release on mandatory parole
and 17 years, 11 months, and 4 days of earned good conduct
time in exchange for his pleas of guilty to the new charges.
Claim Four: The VPB violated Cain's right to equal
protection and fair warning that his earned good conduct time
credits would be revoked if he violated the conditions of his
moves to dismiss the § 2254 Petition. For the reasons
explained below, the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 9) will be
Procedural and Factual History
November 30, 2011, Cain filed a petition for a writ of habeas
corpus with the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond
("Circuit Court"). (§ 2254 Pet. 19.) The
Circuit Court provided the following accurate summary of the
procedural history of this matter:
Petitioner was released from custody on parole in November
2008 after serving nearly 21 years of a 39-year sentence for
attempted robbery with use of a firearm and three counts of
armed robbery. Petitioner was then arrested in March 2010 and
charged with robbery and malicious wounding, among other
crimes. Me pleaded guilty on April 12, 2011, to a number of
offenses and received a 45-year sentence, with 37 years
suspended, resulting in an active sentence of eight years.
After pleading guilty, he was brought back into detention and
received notice of a parole violation hearing to be held on
May 13, 2011. Petitioner claims this hearing never occurred.
The Virginia Parole Board (the "Board") has
searched its records and has not found any evidence of a
parole hearing for Petitioner on this date. The Board does
not admit that the hearing never occurred; only that they do
not have sufficient evidence of the hearing in their records.
So out of an abundance of caution, the Board scheduled
another revocation hearing for April 10, 2012. This hearing
did take place, Petitioners parole was revoked
because of his recent convictions, and the unserved sentence
from his original convictions was reinstated.
(§2254 Pet. 19-20.) 
Applicable Constraints Upon Habeas Review
order to obtain federal habeas relief, at a minimum, a
petitioner must demonstrate that he is "in custody in
violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the
United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). The Anti
terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
("AEDPA") further circumscribed this Court's
authority to grant relief by way of a writ of habeas corpus.
Specifically, "[s]tate court factual determinations are
presumed to be correct and may be rebutted only by clear and
convincing evidence." Gray v. Branker, 529 F.3d
220, 228 (4th Cir. 2008) (citing 28 U.S.C. §
2254(e)(1)). Additionally, under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), a
federal court may not grant a writ of habeas corpus based on
any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in state court
unless the adjudicated claim:
(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved
an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal
law, as determined by the ...