Opinion
CASE NO. 3:12 CV 123
03-22-2012
STACEY Y. ROYAL, Petitioner, v. STATE OF OHIO, et al., Respondents
JUDGE DAN AARON POLSTER
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER
On January 19, 2012, petitioner pro se Stacey Y. Royal filed the above-captioned petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Royal challenges her October 2010 convictions in the Wood County Court of Common Pleas for telecommunications fraud, insurance fraud, theft, and engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity. For the reasons stated below, the petition is denied and this action is dismissed.
A federal court may entertain a habeas petition filed by a person in state custody only on the ground that she is in custody in violation of the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). In addition, petitioner must have exhausted all available state remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b).
It is evident on the face of the petition that Royal has yet to exhaust her direct appeals in the Ohio Courts. (ECF #1, p.2). Thus, without regard to the potential merits of the grounds sought to be raised herein, the petition is premature.
Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. Fed.R.App.P. 22(b); 28 U.S.C. § 2253.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________
DAN AARON POLSTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE