Federal Habeas Corpus Cases

 

 

Open

 

 

 

 

U.S. District Court
District of Maine
U.S.A. v. Richard Daniels

2:18-cr-63-GZS-001

1033   Criminal Judgement

Daniels v U.S.A.
2:21-cv-312-GZS

Magistrate Judge John C. Nivison

Judge George Z. Singal

 

 

1071   2255 Motion 11/01/21

1077   Government Response 01/31/21

1083   Reply 01/25/21
1105   Magistrate judge Recommendation 04/08/22

            Magistrate Judge John C. Nivison

file:///C:/Users/mjdee/Documents/2022%20SCOTUS/1st%20Danials%20Decided/1105%20daniels%20magistrate%20judge.pdf

1113   Opposition
1115   Denial of COA 05/19/22 Judge George Z. Singal

 

SCOTOS 22-6641

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-6144.html

 

 

U.S. District Court
District of Maryland

21/10/10

U.S.A. v. Wheeler
Criminal Case No. CCB-19-455

70        Criminal Judgment

Wheeler v U.S.A.

Civil No. CCB-21-cv-2691

 

Catherine C. Blake

United States District Judge

 

 

72        2255 Motion 10/10/2021

73        Order to respond. 12/3/21

79        Government response 2/18/22

80        Wheeler’s reply. 3/1//22

 

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

HABEAS CORPUS 

“The writ of habeas corpus is a high prerogative writ, known to the common law, the great object of which is the liberation of those who may be imprisoned without sufficient cause. Ex Parte Watkins, 28 U.S. 193, 202 (1830) Chief Justice Marshall.

Court Rules and Federal laws 

(Redundant)

 

United States District Court

Post-conviction relief.

 

Title 28 U.S. Code Chapter 153 Habeas Corpus § 2255 Motions to Vacate Convictions

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2255

 

         U.S. District Courts in dismissing § 2255 motions to vacate, the government lawyers and judges failed to respond to the allegation of Ground One which are the same in all the applications. Section 12

 

 

RULES GOVERNING SECTION 2255 PROCEEDINGS FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Rule 5 (b) Contents. The answer must address the allegations in the motion.  https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/rules-governing-section-2254-and-section-2255-proceedings.pdf  pages 14, 19

  

 

            The U, S. District Courts have denied Certificate of Appealability (COA) There is no substantial denial of any constitutional right being in federal custody. 28 USC § 2253

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2253

 

This denies being incarcerated is seizure of person and deprivation of prisoners'  constitutional right of liberty. They are political prisoners.

 

Amendment V. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law.

 

SCOTUS
Original Jurisdiction
Habeas Corpus

"Writs of habeas corpus may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof,the district courts and any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions. " 28 U.S.C. 2241 (a)

   https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2241

 

“If addressed to the Supreme Court, a justice thereof or a circuit judge it shall state the reasons for not making application to the district court of the district in which the applicant is held.”  28 U.S.C. 2242  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2242

 

 “A court, justice or judge entertaining an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall forthwith award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto.” 28 U.S.C. 2243 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2243

 

SCOTUS RULES 20.4. (a) (b).

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/supct/rule_20

 

 

• (b) Habeas corpus proceedings are ex parte, unless the Court requires the respondent to show cause why the petition for a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted. A response, if ordered, shall comply fully with Rule 15. Neither the denial of the petition, without more, nor an order of transfer to a district court under the authority of 28 U. S. C. §2241(b), is an adjudication on the merits, and therefore does not preclude further application to another court for the relief sought.

 

When SCOTUS denied petitions for habeas corpus they are denying to order a response to the petition and the petitioner is being directed to file in a different court for habeas relief. 20.4. (b).

 

 APPLICATIONS/PETITIONS 

      The first few petitions listed for habeas corpus have reached SCOTUS.  They have already been to the lower court they were convicted in.  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2242

 

The court should have ordered the response. The court rules are inconsistent with federal law 28 U.S.C. 2243. (the word court refers to the district court)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2243

 

 

       The following SCOTUS cases  have link to the docket. 

 

 

1. Villarreal

(a) District of Southern Texas

 

2021-08-23

 

USA v Villarreal

5:21−cv−00096

030      Criminal Judgment 8/24/20

Villarreal v USA

5:21-cv-96

Marina Garcia Marmolejo
United States District Judge
 

001      Motion to Vacate 8/23/2021

002      Mem. of in support

005      ORDER 03/23/2022

006      FINAL JUDGEMENT 03/23/2022

 

 

(b) SCOTUS

In re Roberto Villarreal

21-7973

This case 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-7973.html

 

Conference June 16, 2022
Denied June 21, 2022
Rehearing June 26, 2022
Distributed July 28, 2022
Denied August 22 .2022

When I prepare a writ I have 5 numbered full pages. Getting other documents notarized the I notice something odd about the 5th page. There was extra pace. But it did not click.

 

Once the writ was docketed in SCOTUS, I saw the errors. No constitutional provisions and the date was incorrect. I do remember that twice a pop up appeared asking if I wanted to continue to share documents. I said no. WTF

But the most important part is the questioned presented

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

2. PINEDA

(a) U.S. District Court,
District of Eastern Texas

2020-10-19

Pineda v U.S.A.; U.S.A. v Pineda

6:19cr39

 

Pinada v USA

 

6:20 cv 559  

Jeremy D. Kernodle

U.S. District Judge

325      Pineda’s 2255 motion to vacate Filed 10/19/2020

 

 001       2255 motion to vacate filed 10/19/20

 005     Report and Reccomendation of Magistrate Judge 06/10/21  

 006     Pineda objection 
 007     Judges opinion and order. 

008     Judgment Denied Certificate of Appealability.  No constitutional right is denied by incarceration.

(b) SCOTUS

In Re In Pineda

21-5821

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-5821.html 

Denied  11/01/2021

21-7410

.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-7410.html 

Appendix not posted.? Posted in 21-5821

 

 

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

3. WAFER

(a) U.S. District Court, District of Oregon

U.S.A. v. Wafer 
2020/12/15

Judge Robert E. Jones

 

17 cr 435

258      Habeas corpus § 2255 filed 12/15/2020

264      Government response filed 02/04/21
                       Marijuana not a fundamental right

266      Wafer’s reply 03/08/21

267      Court order. Filed 03/26/21

269      COA Denied. 03/29/21

 

 

SCOTUS

In Re Wafer

21-334

Filing of Extra ordinary Writ of Habeas corpus 06/09/2021, conference 9/27/21 denied 10/4/21

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-334.html

Petition denied

 

21-715

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-715.html

Denied Rehearing

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

4. RAY

U.S. District Court,

District of Northern Texas

2020/4/20

U.S.A. v. Ray 

19-cr-00010-O(5)

 

20-CV-049-O

Judge Reed O’Connor

 

267    Ray’s § 2255 motion filed 4/20/20.

 

7:20-cv- 49-O 

005      Order to Amend 12/21/20

006      Amended Motion 2255 01/04/21

007      Order COA Denied 04/16/21

008      Final judgement. 04/16/21

SCOTUS
21-54

In Re Ray

 https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-54.html

Docket Number 21-54
Denied 10/4/21

 

 

OTHER 2255 Motions to Vacate

U.S. District Courts

All district court document can be access on PACER 

https://pacer.login.uscourts.gov/csologin/login.jsf

Cases not closed.

U.S. District Court
District of Maryland

21/10/10

U.S.A. v. Wheeler
Criminal Case No. CCB-19-455

70        Criminal Judgment

Wheeler v U.S.A.

Civil No. CCB-21-cv-2691

 

Catherine C. Blake

United States District Judge

 

 

72        2255 Motion 10/10/2021

73        Order to respond. 12/3/21

79        Government response 2/18/22

80        Wheeler’s reply. 3/1//22

 

U.S. District Court
District of Maine
U.S.A. v. Richard Daniels

2:18-cr-63-GZS-001

1033   Criminal Judgement

Daniels v U.S.A.
2:21-cv-312-GZS

Magistrate Judge John C. Nivison

Judge George Z. Singal

 

 

1071   2255 Motion 11/01/21

1077   Government Response 01/31/21

1083   Reply 01/25/21
1105   Magistrate judge Recommendation 04/08/22

            Magistrate Judge John C. Nivison

file:///C:/Users/mjdee/Documents/2022%20SCOTUS/1st%20Danials%20Decided/1105%20daniels%20magistrate%20judge.pdf

1113   Opposition
1115   Denial of COA 05/19/22 Judge George Z. Singal
 

 

 

 

Closed CASES

 

 

U.S. District Court
District of Southern Mississippi

2022/03/24

U.S.A. v Jones

1:21-cr-67 LG-RPM-001

Criminal Judgment 10/7/21

Jones v U.S.A.
1:22 CV 65-LG

 

LOUIS GUIROLA, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

10       2255 Motion to Vacate 3/24/

11        Mem of Law

12        Court order 4/21/22

13        COA Denied 4/21/22

14        Reconsideration 5/5/22

15        Denied 5/9/22

 

U.S. District Court
District of Western Louisiana

2020/05/11

U.S.A. v. Robinson
3;18-cr-228-1

Judge Terry A. Doughty

Mag. Judge Karen L. Hayes

 

34       Criminal Judgment

40      Robinson’s § 2255 Motion 5/11/2020

43      Court Order   5/13/ 2020
44      Court judgment  5/13/2021

45      Court Denies COA Denies Standing. Liberty not a right

 

 

U.S. District Court
District of Southern Mississippi 

2020/02/28
U.S.A. v. Davison
3:17-CR-149-DPJ-FKB

 

Davison v USA

3:20 cv 116

 

Daniel P. Jordan III

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

In Behalf § 2255. (e)

195     §  2255 motion in behalf. 2/28/2022

196     §  2255 Court order 3/3/2020
206     In behalf opposition to order 3//3/2020
207     Court order denial opposition to 196 3/3/2020

 Davison’s Filing

201     Davison  §  2255 motion

202     §  2255 Court order.3/18/2020
204     Court Denies COA  3/10/2020

 

 

U.S. District Court
District of Western Michigan

10/22/2020

U.S.A. v. Corbin closed

 1:18-cr-166

Corbin v USA

20-cv-1010

 

Paul L. Maloney United States District Judge

316      2255 Motion to vacate Filed 10/22/2020
317     Memorandum of law

318     Order to Answer 10/23/2020 60 days to Respond

324     USA Motion to Dismiss 12/16/2020

330     Corbin’s Response 1/8/2021

334     Order Time Barred

 

   

U.S. District Court
District of Virgin Island

U.S.A. v. Bully Closed

1:17-cr-00012-1 
George W. Cannon, Jr. Magistrate Judge

 

147     2255 Motion to Vacate, Habeas Relief

164     OPPOSITION  Dated: June 21, 2019

Gretchen C. F. Shappert United States Attorney, 

/s/ Daniel H. Huston Assistant U.S. Attorney

168     REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 07/22/2019

George W. Cannon, Jr. Magistrate Judge

171      Opposition  to R. & R.

192     Bully’s 2255 motion ignored

 

U.S. District Court
District of Maine

2019/06/03

U.S.A. v Sawtelle

1:17-cr-00125-JDL-2
John C. Nivison, U.S. Magistrate Judge 
Chief Judge JON D. LEVY

142     Sawtelle’s § 2255 motion filed 6/3/19
143     Order to respond 6/4/2019 60 days

144     USA Response p. 5-7. 7/29/2019

145     Reply 8/12/2019

147     Recommendation p. 6-7  12/17/2019 John C. Nivison, U.S. Magistrate Judge 
148     Objection 12/30/2019

149     Order COA denied.  2/6/2020 Chief Judge JON D. LEVY

 

U.S. District Court
District of Wyoming

2019-05-14

U.S.A. v. Doty Closed 

I:18-CR-0102-SWS 
18cr102

Judge Scott W. Skavdahl

 

44      Doty  §  2255 motion I filed in behalf  § 2255(e) 5/14/2021

45      Doty 2255 order Dismissed Marijuana not a fundamental right.                                    5/16/2019