S. Ct. Civ. No. 2015-0117

Considering an appeal from an opinion and order of the Superior Court denying a petition for habeas corpus as procedurally barred, the Superior Court correctly recognized that, under Virgin Islands law, such a petition should be granted and the matter set for an evidentiary hearing on the merits if the petitioner has set forth a prima facie case for relief, and the petition is not procedurally barred. Nevertheless, in determining that the habeas petition in this case was procedurally barred, the Superior Court placed undue weight on the fact that the petitioner had appealed his underlying criminal convictions to the Appellate Division and the Third Circuit. Issues raised on direct appeal to the Appellate Division and the Third Circuit are not procedurally barred in a local habeas corpus action. Even so, while the fact that the Appellate Division and the Third Circuit affirmed petitioner's convictions does not establish a procedural bar providing that he is per se banned from seeking habeas relief, he still maintains the burden of establishing a prima facie case for relief, meaning that he must establish facts that-if true-would entitle him to relief. Accordingly, the conclusion that the petition is not procedurally barred, is not a determination that petitioner has set forth a prima facie case on all or some of his claims, including alleged prosecutorial misconduct, violation of due process, and whether the government violated its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), all of which are questions of law. The Superior Court's October 30, 2015 opinion and order is reversed, and the case is remanded so that the Superior Court may determine whether petitioner has established a prima facie case on any of his claims.