Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Michael Girrard Grooms v. Edward W. Murray, Director of The Virginia Department of Corrections, 42 F.3d 1385, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed an appeal from Michael Grooms, who had filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit and that Grooms' ineffective assistance and other claims either failed the standard in Strickland v. Washington or were procedurally barred under state law. The court therefore denied a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismissed the case.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1994-12-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 42 F.3d 1385 Docket: 94-6110

    Original Title

    Michael Girrard Grooms v. Edward W. Murray, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, 42 F.3d 1385, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed an appeal from Michael Grooms, who had filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit and that Grooms' ineffective assistance and other claims either failed the standard in Strickland v. Washington or were procedurally barred under state law. The court therefore denied a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismissed the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    8 views2 pages

    Michael Girrard Grooms v. Edward W. Murray, Director of The Virginia Department of Corrections, 42 F.3d 1385, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed an appeal from Michael Grooms, who had filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit and that Grooms' ineffective assistance and other claims either failed the standard in Strickland v. Washington or were procedurally barred under state law. The court therefore denied a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismissed the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    42 F.

    3d 1385

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 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 Fourth
    Circuit.
    Michael Girrard GROOMS, Petitioner Appellant,
    v.
    Edward W. MURRAY, Director of the Virginia Department of
    Corrections, Respondent Appellee.
    No. 94-6110.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: Nov. 17, 1994.
    Decided: Dec. 5, 1994.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
    Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-93-685)
    Michael Girrard Grooms, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr.,
    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, VA, for Appellee.
    E.D.N.C.
    DISMISSED.
    Before RUSSELL and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER,
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28
    U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. Our review of the record and the district
    court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses
    that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable
    cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.*

    Grooms v. Murray, No. CA-93-685 (E.D. Va. Jan. 20, 1994). We dispense with
    oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
    in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional
    process.
    2

    DISMISSED.

    We agree that Grooms' ineffective assistance claims fail the test of Strickland v.
    Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Grooms' remaining claims are procedurally
    barred because he failed to present those claims in his first state habeas corpus
    petition, see Va.Code Ann. Sec. 8.01-654(B)(2) (Michie 1992), and because he
    failed to show cause and prejudice for his default. See Bassette v. Thompson,
    915 F.2d 932, 937 (4th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 982 (1991). Finally,
    we grant Grooms' motion to file an amended informal brief

    You might also like