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.

Ebron v. Brown

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

January 19, 2018

THOMAS EBRON, Petitioner,
v.
KAREN D. BROWN, et al., Respondent.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          Roderick C. Young Judge

         Thomas Ebron, a Virginia state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("§ 2254 Petition, " ECF No. 1). The matter is before the Court for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Respondent moves to dismiss, inter alia, on the ground that the one-year statute of limitations governing federal habeas petitions bars the § 2254 Petition. (ECF No. 13, at 3-8.) Ebron has responded. (ECF No. 15.) For the reasons set forth below, it is RECOMMENDED that the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 11) be GRANTED.

         A. Procedural History

         On October 15, 1985, Ebron pled guilty to capital murder, robbery, and a firearm violation in the Circuit Court for the City of Alexandria ("Circuit Court"). Plea Agreement 2, Commonwealth v. Ebron, No. F-7291 (Va. Cir. Ct. filed Oct. 15, 1985). On December 16, 1985, the Circuit Court sentenced Ebron to life imprisonment plus two years. Judgment 2, Commonwealth v. Ebron, No. F-7291 (Va. Cir. Ct. Dec. 16, 1985) . Ebron neither appealed nor fild a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

         In March 2016, Ebron was denied parole by the Virginia Parole Board ("VPB") on the following grounds:

• Crimes committed - Homicide-Capital; Robbery; Weapon Offense
• Extensive criminal record
• History of violence
• Release at this time would diminish seriousness of crime
• Serious nature and circumstances of your offense(s).[1]

         On February 15, 2017, Ebron filed the instant § 2254 Petition. Ebron raises four claims for relief.[2] Specifically,

Claim One "Ebron claims that he was unlawfully and unconstitutionally sentenced . where the sentence was imposed after a review of his juvenile criminal history, in a [Presentence Investigation Report ("PSR")] he had no knowledge of, in violation of his right to due process . . . creating a miscarriage of justice." (Br. Supp. § 2254 Pet. 4, ECF No. 2.)
Claim Two "Ebron claims that the Circuit Court . did not have subject matter or personal jurisdiction for which to prosecute him, and did do in violation of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act's Anti[-]Shuttling Provision, creating a miscarriage of justice." (Id.)
Claim Three "Ebron claims that he was denied effective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment where his trial attorney knew that a [PSR] was made, pursuant to an investigation and Ebron was not informed, and, that the [Interstate Agreement on Detainers] was violated prior to trial creating a miscarriage of justice." (Id. at 4-5.)
Claim Four "Ebron claims that he has been unlawfully denied parole, where the [VPB] has reviewed and relied upon information in his file to deny him parole (pre-sentence report), creating a miscarriage of justice." (Id. at 5.)

         As explained below, Ebron's Claim Four lacks merit and his remaining claims are barred by the statute of limitations.

         B. Analysis

         1. Claim Four Lacks Merit

         The Due Process Clause applies when government action deprives an individual of a legitimate liberty or property interest. See Bd. of Regents of State Colls, v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569-70 (1972). Thus, the first step in analyzing a procedural due process claim is to identify whether the alleged conduct affects a protected liberty or property interest. Beverati v. Smith, 120 F.3d 500, 502 (4th Cir. 1997) (citations omitted). Where government action impacts a protected liberty interest, the second step is to determine "what process is due" under the circumstances. Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, ...


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.