United States District Court, D. Maryland
RICHARD D. BENNETT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Marchand Henry, Sr., currently confined at Eastern
Correctional Institution in Westover, Maryland, filed a
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254. ECF No. 1. The Petition challenges his 2016
conviction in the Circuit Court for Worcester County,
Maryland for felonious possession of heroin and the use of a
minor in a drug distribution offense. Id.; ECF No.
4-1, p. 7. Respondents filed a Limited Answer in which they
sought dismissal of the Petition on the basis of
non-exhaustion and/or procedural default. ECF No. 4.
Subsequently, Henry opposed Respondents' arguments in a
pleading entitled "Motion Opposing Default Claims,
" which the Court docketed as a Motion for Other Relief.
ECF No. 6. The Court finds no need for an evidentiary
hearing. See Rule 8(a), Rules Governing Section
2254 Cases in the United States District Courts and
Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2016); see also Fisher v.
Lee, 215 F.3d 438, 455 (4th Cir. 2000) (petitioner not
entitled to a hearing under 28 U.S.C. §2254(e)(2)). For
the reasons that follow, the Petition is denied and
dismissed, and a Certificate of Appealability shall not
February 25, 2016, Henry pleaded guilty to felonious
possession of heroin and the use of a minor in a drug
distribution offense in the Circuit Court for Worcester
County. ECF No. 4-1, p. 7. On May 6, 2016, he was sentenced
to a total of 15 years in prison. ECF No. 1, p. 1; ECF No.
4-1, p. 8. Henry did not seek leave to appeal from his
convictions. ECF No. 1, p. 2.
October 31, 2016, Henry filed a pro se petition for
post-conviction relief, which he supplemented, through
counsel, on February 3, 2017. ECF No. 1, p. 2; ECF No. 4-1,
pp. 11-12. Henry aruged that trial counsel rendered
ineffective assistance "in failing to give accurate
advice about the possible sentence." See ECF
No. 1, p. 3. Specifically, Henry asserted that trial counsel
assured him that he would be sentenced to no more than two
years if he pleaded guilty, and that he would not have
pleaded guilty if he knew that his sentence would be more
than two years. See ECF No. 4-2, p. 3. The
post-conviction court denied Henry's petition on February
28, 2017, concluding that Henry "was fully and
accurately advised of the sentence which he could receive as
a consequence of his guilty plea." ECF No. 4-2. Henry
filed an untimely application for leave to appeal this denial
to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, and it was
"returned as undeliverable 18 days after the
deadline." ECF No. 1, pp. 3-4.
IN THIS COURT
Petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in this Court, Henry
claims that he is being detained in state custody illegally
and presents four grounds, all of which relate to the advice
he received regarding his potential sentence:
the trial court, prosecutor, and trial counsel violate the
plea agreement where Henry was not properly advised about
the trial court, prosecutor, and trial counsel violate
Henry's right to an accurate sentence where he was not
properly advised about sentence suspension and parole
the trial court and prosecutor mislead Henry regarding the
sentence where he was not provided notice of the mandatory
sentence and enhancement?
the trial court and prosecutor err by stating that Henry had
a limited possibility for parole and suspension of his
threshold matter, a petitioner seeking habeas relief in
federal court must exhaust the remedies available in state
court. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1) (2012); Rose v.
Lundy,455 U.S. 509, 510 (1982). This exhaustion
requirement is satisfied by seeking review of the claim in
the highest state court with jurisdiction to consider the
claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(c). For a person
convicted of a criminal offense in Maryland, this may be
accomplished either on direct appeal or in post-conviction
proceedings. To exhaust a claim on direct appeal in
non-capital cases, a defendant must assert it in an appeal to
the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland and then to the
Court of Appeals of Maryland by way of a petition for a writ
of certiorari. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud.
Proc. §§ 12-201, 12-301 (West 2011). To exhaust a
claim through post-conviction proceedings, it must be raised
in a petition filed in the Circuit Court and in an
application for leave to ...