The opinion
CLERK'S OFFICE U.S. DIST. COUR
AT ROANOKE, VA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT September 04, 2025
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA jaopa AUSTIN, CLERK
ROANOKE DIVISION BY:
“DEDULY CLERK
William Patrick Brown, )
Petitioner,
v. Civil Action No. 7:25-cv-00607
Clay A. Corbin,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner William Patrick Brown, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, submitted a
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Dkt. 1.) He contends
that he is being wrongfully detained at NRADC Jail.
Federal courts cannot consider habeas petitions until the claims asserted have been
exhausted. Brown v. Keohane, 475 F. Supp. 943, 944 (E.D. Va. 1979). Exhaustion requires
that the issue be presented to the state’s highest court and considered on the merits. O'Sw/iivan
v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 842-45 (1999). “Put another way, Petitioner cannot directly seek
federal court review of a state prison administrative gtievance—as a matter of federal law, and
based on principles of federalism and comity—without going through the state court system.”
Unas v. Soto, No. CV 15-772 VBF MRW, 2015 WL 3901653, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 18, 2015).
Brown’s Petition states that he has not exhausted any state court remedies, specifying
that he neither appealed nor pursued any state court post-conviction proceedings prior to
submitting this federal habeas action. (Dkt. 1 at 3-7, 10-13.) Therefore, at this time,
Brown’s claims are unexhausted and premature for this court’s consideration. His claims
must be dismissed without prejudice, preserving his right to refile in federal court after state
court exhaustion is complete. Brown, 475 F. Supp. at 944.
For this reason, the court DISMISSES this action without prejudice. The Clerk 1s
DIRECTED to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Brown.
ENTERED this 4th day of September, 2025.
faders. H. Goo
HON. JASMINE H. YOON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2.