United States District Court, D. Maryland
XINIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
the Court is Devin Aric Moore's Petition for a Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF Nos. 1,
5. Respondents filed an Answer in which they argued that the
Petition should be dismissed for failing to exhaust state
avenues for relief. ECF No. 8. This Court ordered Petitioner
to respond to the exhaustion argument, and Petitioner has
done so. ECF 12. After reviewing all pleadings, the Court
finds a hearing unnecessary. See Rule 8(a),
Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts; see also 28 U.S.C. §
2254(e)(2). For the reasons set forth herein, the Court shall
DENY AND DISMISS the Petition without prejudice.
6, 2017 in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Petitioner
pled guilty to armed robbery, use of a firearm in connection
with a violent felony, and impersonation of a police officer,
and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. ECF No. 6
at 1; ECF No. 8-1 at 1, 4. On July 7, 2017, Petitioner sent
the presiding judge a letter requesting review of his case by
a three-judge panel, modification of his sentence, and leave
to appeal. ECF No. 8-2 at 3-4. The letter identified three
purported errors with the criminal proceedings: (1)
Petitioner's right to a speedy trial was violated because
more than 180 days passed between his initial appearance and
his guilty plea; (2) Petitioner's conviction for use of a
handgun in the commission of a crime was not supported by
sufficient evidence because the state failed to establish
that a crime of violence was committed or that the firearm at
issue was a handgun; and (3) the State “illegaly [sic]
remov[ed] pictures from [Petitioner's] social media due
to lack of sufficient authentication” and the court
erred when it admitted these pictures into evidence. ECF No.
8-2 at 3-4.
August 3, 2017, before the state courts ruled on any of the
three motions contained within Petitioner's letter,
Petitioner filed the instant § 2254 Petition with this
Court, raising the sole argument that his right to a speedy
trial was violated. ECF No. 1. At the Court's
instruction, ECF No. 4, Petitioner filed a supplemental
Petition, raising six grounds for relief, ECF No. 5.
August 30, 2017, the Baltimore City Circuit Court denied
Petitioner's Motion for Sentence Modification. ECF No.
12-1 at 3. On September 18, 2017, the three-judge panel
rejected Petitioner's Application, concluding that
“the sentence imposed was fair and just under all the
circumstances.” ECF No. 12-1 at 4. Also on September
18, Petitioner filed his state petition for post-conviction
relief with the Circuit Court. ECF No. 12-1 at 5-7. That
petition appears to be still pending. ECF No. 12
(Petitioner's statement from November 20, 2017, that he
has “not heard from circuit court” regarding the
collateral petition). On October 2, 2017, the Maryland Court
of Special Appeals denied Petitioner's Application for
Leave to Appeal. ECF No. 12-1 at 1.
noted above, Petitioner filed his initial § 2254
petition on August 3, 2017. ECF No. 1. On September 15, 2017,
Petitioner filed a supplement to his petition in which he
raises the following grounds for relief:
A. Ground One: use of a firearm in commission of a crime
Supporting Facts: State did not prove I utilized a weapon,
ballistic evidence was consistent with a handgun that was not
a handgun [sic. State didn't prove gun was employed.
B. Ground Two: In[e]ffective assistance of counsel Supporting
Facts: Failed to present evidence, counsel fell below
representation objective standard of reasonableness, He erred
in pre-trial, counsel['s] decision was forced upon me due
to inattention and lack of preparation.
C. Ground Three: Armed Robbery Supporting Facts: State did
not prove larceny intent, without larceny intent there is no
armed robbery, nor do they have a weapon. Victim stated none
D. Ground Four: Impersonation Supporting Facts: At no time
didn't [sic] have fraudulent design on person or property
stating I was a police officer.
E. Ground [Five]: Violating my Hicks Supporting Facts: Court
failed to have me in court within 180 days according to Md
Ann Code art. 27, 591 and Md. R. 4-271, and no good cause was
F. Ground [Six]: no evidence Supporting [F]acts: State did
not have any evidence to convict me. My plea offer was not
based on character, prior record, or circumstance of the
crime. There was no ...