Case Caption: Woodrup v. Gov't of the VICase Number: SCT-CIV-2019-0006Date: 01/25/2022Author: Cabret, Maria M. Citation: 2022 VI 1Summary: The Superior Court’s denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed. A petition for writ of habeas corpus should be granted and the matter set for an evidentiary hearing on the merits if it sets forth a prima facie case for relief, and is not procedurally barred. The factual allegations, however, must be factually supported; merely alleging impropriety by the government, or making any other allegation, without the proper factual predicate, cannot state a prima facie case for relief. A petitioner must make allegations that, if later proven true, would entitle him to habeas relief, and these allegations must also have specific factual support. In this case the Superior Court correctly found that the petitioner’s claims of perjured testimony and unconstitutional identification were founded on conclusory or speculative factual assertions, and that such assertions were insufficient to warrant granting his petition and holding a hearing on the merits. The judgment is affirmedAttachment: Open Document or Opinion