Annarelli v. Clarke, No. 7:2021cv00356 - Document 6 (W.D. Va. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Elizabeth K. Dillon on 10/4/2021. (Opinion mailed to Pro Se Party via US Mail)(tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Annarelli v. Clarke Doc. 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION DAVID J. ANNARELLI, Petitioner, v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, DIRECTOR, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 7:21-cv-00356 By: Elizabeth K. Dillon United States District Judge MEMORANDUM OPINION David J. Annarelli, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a motion for writ of error coram nobis in this matter, alleging factual errors in statements made by the prosecution in Floyd County Circuit Court which were accepted by the court as the factual basis for Annarelli’s plea of guilty and subsequent conviction for malicious wounding of a law enforcement officer in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-51.1. Because this matter is a civil case, sounding in habeas jurisdiction, the court has no authority to grant the motion, and it will be denied. I. BACKGROUND This matter was filed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on June 9, 2021. As set forth in the court’s memorandum opinion of July 8, 2021, the petition was dismissed on that date, without prejudice, as a second or subsequent § 2254 habeas petition, filed without preauthorization from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). Annarelli filed the current motion one week after the dismissal of his habeas petition herein. II. DISCUSSION As explained more fully in this court’s opinion in Annarelli v. Clarke, No. 7:20cv00025, entered this same date, Congress has abolished writs of error coram nobis in civil cases in federal Dockets.Justia.com court. Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(e). Habeas corpus cases are civil in nature. Fisher v. Baker, 203 U.S. 174, 181 (1906). This case was filed as a petition for habeas corpus, and thus the court is without authority to consider a writ of error coram nobis. III. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated herein, Annarelli’s motion for writ of error coram nobis will be denied and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Further, concluding that Annarelli has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1), a certificate of appealability will be denied. An appropriate order will be entered this day. Entered: October 4, 2021. /s/ Elizabeth K. Dillon Elizabeth K. Dillon United States District Judge
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
