UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7016
MARLIN MAURICE DUMAS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
District Judge. (2:13-cv-00398-RBS-LRL)
Submitted: May 27, 2016 Decided: June 15, 2016
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David W. O’Brien, Daniel T. Campbell, Joseph L. Meadows, Craig
P. Lytle, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.
Mark R. Herring, Attorney General of Virginia, Kathleen B.
Martin, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marlin Maurice Dumas appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition as untimely. In
his petition, Dumas sought to challenge his Virginia sentence of
mandatory life without parole under Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.
Ct. 2455 (2012). * The district court concluded that Miller was
not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review for
purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(C) (2012), but granted a
certificate of appealability on the issue.
Subsequent to the district court’s decision, the Supreme
Court held in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718, 732
(2016), that Miller “announced a substantive rule that is
retroactive in cases on collateral review.” Because the
district court did not have the benefit of this decision, we
vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings in light
of Montgomery. We express no opinion as to the timeliness or
merits of Dumas’ petition. We grant Dumas’ unopposed motion for
judicial notice. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
* Dumas received this mandatory life sentence for capital
murder; he was 16 at the time he committed the offense.
2
materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
3