Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Robinson v. State

Superior Court of Rhode Island

June 18, 2014

SHAWN ROBINSON
v.
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

Providence County Superior Court

ATTORNEYS:

For Plaintiff: Shawn Robinson, pro se

For Defendant: John E. Corrigan, Esq.

DECISION

CLIFTON, J.

This matter is before the Court following preliminary hearings on Petitioner Shawn Robinson's (Petitioner or Robinson) form Pro Se Application for Post-Conviction Relief Petition (Application), PM 2014-1317, filed January 15, 2014.

In a document (Omnibus Calendar Assignment Form) accompanying his Application, Robinson further alleges that, "I am being unlawfully held in segregation on disciplinary confinement status and denied legal telephone calls; access to the seg. law cart; and deprived my needed legal materials to appeal this wrongful conviction on the trumped up ACI charge for possession of a weapon that ACI staff planted." (Emphasis added).

Robinson appeared before this Court in regard to his Application first on May 14, 2014 and lastly on June 13, 2014. After considering Robinson's Application, the State's Answer to the Application, Robinson's additional written submissions filed June 6, 2014[1] and June 9, 2014 and Robinson's oral arguments, this Court is compelled to rule that Robinson's Petition must be dismissed without prejudice because Robinson's direct appeal from his conviction is still pending.

I Facts and Travel

On February 9, 2011, the State of Rhode Island (State) filed a one-count Criminal Information (P2/2011-392A) charging that Robinson ". . . while incarcerated at the Adult Correctional Institution's Maximum Security did wear or carry concealed on his person a knife having a blade of more than three (3) inches in length . . . in violation of § 11-47-42(2) of the General Laws of Rhode Island, 1956, as amended (Reenactment of 2002)."

Following his arraignment, rulings on the numerous motions filed either by the attorney who represented him or the numerous motions filed by himself pro se before and after the appointment of stand-by counsel and several pre-trial conferences, a jury trial eventually took place on that charge before this Court beginning on July 16, 2012 and ending on July 20, 2012. The jury returned a guilty verdict on the charge. Robinson's Motion for New Trial was heard and denied by the Court on November 13, 2012. On January 16, 2013, Robinson was sentenced to a three-year term to serve consecutive to the sentence Robinson was then serving, imposed upon him by the State of Connecticut. On January 16, 2013, a "Notice of Appeal" from the conviction in P2/2011-392A was filed on behalf of Robinson by his then private attorney.

Subsequently, on January 15, 2014, Robinson filed his Application pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 10-9.1-1, et seq. On April 18, 2014, the State filed its Answer to Robinson's Application. Robinson appeared before this Court in this matter on May 30, 2014, as a result of his May 14, 2014 "Motion to Assign" and his "Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus for Post-Conviction Relief." Robinson appeared on May 30, 2014 pro se.

At the hearing on May 30, 2014, Robinson verbally acknowledged that his direct appeal, filed January 16, 2013, from his conviction in P2/2011-392A, was still pending. The State, at this hearing, orally raised the argument that because Robinson's appeal was still pending, this Application was not properly before this Court. This Court sua sponte ordered the State to provide Petitioner with the legal authorities in support of its position that, because Robinson's appeal was still pending, this Application was not properly before this Court. On the same day, May 30, 2014, the State complied with ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.