Lopez v. Cartledge

3 Citing cases

  1. Lopez v. Williams

    Civil Action 4:20-3777-BHH (D.S.C. Sep. 2, 2021)

    Unlike the procedural default ruling in Barbaris, when the undersigned granted summary judgment on Petitioner's first federal habeas petition, she dismissed the petition by adjudicating the substance of Petitioner's claims on their merits. See Lopez v. Cartledge, No. 4:13-CV-2872-BHH, 2015 WL 5554562 (D.S.C. Sept. 21, 2015) (disposing of Petitioner's constitutional, evidentiary, and ineffective assistance of counsel claims in turn), appeal dismissed, No. 15-7653, 642 Fed.Appx. 287, 2016 WL 1259696 (4th Cir. 2016). To be considered successive, the second habeas petition must attack the same conviction and the first habeas petition must have been finally adjudicated on the merits.

  2. Lopez v. Lewis

    C. A. 4:20-3777-BHH-TER (D.S.C. Jun. 29, 2021)

    This Court may take judicial notice of filings in Petitioner's prior §2254 case, including the Order adopting the Report and Recommendation and granting summary judgment in favor of the Respondent and the opinion of the Fourth Circuit dismissing the appeal. See Lopez v. Cartledge, No. 4:13-2872-BHH, 2015 WL 5554562, at *17 (D.S.C. Sept. 21, 2015), appeal dismissed, No. 15-7653, 642 Fed.Appx. 287, 2016 WL 1259696 (4th Cir. Mar. 31, 2016). Therefore, the instant Petition is successive in accordance with §2244(b).

  3. Deas v. Reynolds

    C/A No. 5:15-02343-PMD-KDW (D.S.C. Apr. 15, 2016)

    Therefore, this issue is procedurally barred because Petitioner did not raise any federal constitutional issue at the trial court or state court appellate level. See e.g., Lopez v. Cartledge, No. 4:13-2872-BHH, 2015 WL 5554562, at *17 (D.S.C. Sept. 21, 2015), appeal dismissed, No. 15-7653, 2016 WL 1259696 (4th Cir. Mar. 31, 2016); Johnson v. Mauney, No. 1:11-1753-RMG-SVH, 2012 WL 2149763, at *7 (D.S.C. May 18, 2012), report and recommendation adopted, No. 1:11-1753-RMG, 2012 WL 2154177 (D.S.C. June 13, 2012); Walker v. Warden of Broad River Corr. Inst., No. 1:09-2672, 2010 WL 3701331, at *8 (D.S.C. Sept. 14, 2010). Concerning Ground One, Petitioner may, nonetheless, overcome procedural defaults and have his claims addressed on the merits, by showing either cause and prejudice for the default, or that a miscarriage of justice would result from the lack of such review.