Legal Opinion

Pearson v. Hollingsworth

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided January 3, 2019No. Civil Action No. 2016-0879Published

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PRESTON PEARSON, Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 16-879 (RDM) J. HOLLINGSWORTH, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION Petitioner Preston Pearson, proceeding pro se, filed the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus on April 4, 2016. Dkt. 1. In a previous opinion, this Court dismissed most of his claims for lack of jurisdiction. Dkt. 5 at 1, 3. The matter is now before the Court on Petitioner’s only remaining claim: ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The Court concludes that it need not reach the merits of this claim because the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lawrence v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Clay v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  3. Davis v. CrossDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API