Jacob Lee Gubin v. Colonel Eric Young

W.D. Virginia

Jacob Lee Gubin v. Colonel Eric Young

DecidedOctober 28, 2025

Docket7:25-cv-00699

StatusUnknown

This text of Jacob Lee Gubin v. Colonel Eric Young (Jacob Lee Gubin v. Colonel Eric Young) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jacob Lee Gubin v. Colonel Eric Young, (W.D. Va. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

CLERKS AT ROA NOK BVA □□□ FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT serene □□ FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ne AON EES ROANOKE DIVISION St Beeson □□

Jacob Lee Gubin, ) Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 7:25-cv-00699 Colonel Eric Young, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Jacob Lee Gubin, 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 for a variety of reasons. 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 each issue be presented to the state’s highest court and considered on the merits. O'Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 842-45 (1999). “Put another way, Petitioner cannot directly seek federal court review of a state prison administrative grievance—as a matter of federal law, and based on principles of federalism and comity—without going through the state court system.” Uvias v. Soto, No. CV 15-772 VBF MRW, 2015 WL 3901653, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 18, 2015). Gubin’s Petition states that he has not exhausted any state court remedies, specifying that he neither appealed to the highest level of state court review nor pursued any state court

post-conviction proceedings prior to submitting this federal habeas action. (Dkt. 1 at 2-6, 7, 9-12.) He does reference a pending Virginia Supreme Court appeal but he notes that the case has not been resolved. (Id. at 6,12). Therefore, at this time, Gubin’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 FP. Supp. at 944. For this reason, the court DISMISSES this action without prejudice. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Gubin. ENTERED this 28% day of October, 2025.

HON. JASMINEH. YOON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CLERKS AT ROA NOK BVA □□□ FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT serene □□ FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ne AON EES ROANOKE DIVISION St Beeson □□

Jacob Lee Gubin, ) Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 7:25-cv-00699 Colonel Eric Young, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Jacob Lee Gubin, 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 for a variety of reasons. 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 each issue be presented to the state’s highest court and considered on the merits. O'Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 842-45 (1999). “Put another way, Petitioner cannot directly seek federal court review of a state prison administrative grievance—as a matter of federal law, and based on principles of federalism and comity—without going through the state court system.” Uvias v. Soto, No. CV 15-772 VBF MRW, 2015 WL 3901653, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 18, 2015). Gubin’s Petition states that he has not exhausted any state court remedies, specifying that he neither appealed to the highest level of state court review nor pursued any state court

post-conviction proceedings prior to submitting this federal habeas action. (Dkt. 1 at 2-6, 7, 9-12.) He does reference a pending Virginia Supreme Court appeal but he notes that the case has not been resolved. (Id. at 6,12). Therefore, at this time, Gubin’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 FP. Supp. at 944. For this reason, the court DISMISSES this action without prejudice. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Gubin. ENTERED this 28% day of October, 2025.

HON. JASMINEH. YOON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jacob Lee Gubin v. Colonel Eric Young, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jacob-lee-gubin-v-colonel-eric-young-vawd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack