F.B.I. 18 U.S.C. 242 Complaint
USPS Tracking No.
7018 0360 0002 0227 4978 mailed11/24/2020
delivered 11/30/2020
11/22/2020
Michael H. Schneider
F.B.I. Special Agent
8000 East 36th Avenue on
Denver, CO 80238
(303) 629-7171
Re: Criminal Complaint
I
I am reporting a systemic crime within the judiciary, a violation of Title 18 U.S.C. 242. Deprivation of liberty without due process of law, under the color of law. Stewart Miles Doty is one victim.
I am requesting that you enforce Title 18 U.S.C. 242 on Scott W. Skavdah, Wyoming United States District Judge. The evidence is in the court documents cited below. He has willfully ignored the fact and the law, Amendments IV and V the Constitution of the United States and ruled under the color of law.
Judge Skavdah has willfully ignored the fact that being incarcerated in a federal prison is seizure of person, deprivation of liberty. This is a substantial showing of a denial of Doty’s constitutional right, liberty, freedom from physical restraint, habeas corpus This is within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253(c)(2) by Doty being incarcerated violating federal marijuana laws. This because marijuana is not a fundamental right.
The rule of law is the operations and effect of criminal laws is deprivation of liberty creating an Article III case and controversy.
Under the color of law Judge Skavdah has treated Doty as a non-person, not protected by law, Amendments IV & V of the Constitution of the United States,
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure shall not be violated” . . . “No person shall be deprived of life liberty and property without due process of law.”
Color of Law Violations
https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/civil-rights
“Law enforcement officers and other
officials like judges and prosecutors have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country.
. .”
Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our
1 of 4
nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a
federal crime for anyone acting under “color of
law” to willfully deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the
Constitution or United States law.
Deprivation of Rights Under the Color of Law Title 18 USC 242
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/242fin.php
In the United States District Court
District of Wyoming
United States of America v. Stewart Miles Doty
1:18-cr-0102-SWS
Document 44
Doty’s Title 28 U.S.C. Chapter 153 Habeas corpus § 2255
Motion to Vacate
Page. 3. GROUND ONE: Mr. Doty is being illegally deprived of a substantial constitutional right, his liberty. Congress criminalized marijuana without compelling government reasons therefore without due process of law contravening the 4th and 5th Amendments of the Constitution of the United States and is unconstitutional.
Page. 6 RELIEF: To declare liberty is
freedom from physical restraint and the U.S. Congress criminalizing marijuana was arbitrary and unreasonable regulation of property, depriving Doty of his liberty without a compelling reason, without
due process of law contravening the 4th and 5th Amends. of the U. S. Constitution thus vacating his conviction and sentence . . .
[In] behalf of STEWART MILES DOTY
May 10, 2019
/s/ Michael J. Dee
Document 45
ORDER DISMISSING § 2255 MOTION
A second defect of the § 2255 motion is that it conclusively shows
Mr. Doty is entitled to no relief. The underlying premise of the motion - that the federal marijuana laws are unconstitutional - is without merit. The classification and criminalization of marijuana
under federal law has been repeatedly held constitutional . . . There is no fundamental right to either possess marijuana or produce or distribute marijuana commercially . . . Thus, it would
have been futile for Mr. Doty's attorney to have raised the
2 of 4
unconstitutionality of the marijuana laws. "Due process does not
require the rote
performance of futile exercises."
Dated this 16th day of May, 2019.
/s/ Scott W. Skavdah
United States District Judge
Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings
For the United States District Court
Rule 5. The Answer and The Reply.
(a) When Required. The respondent is not required to answer the motion unless a judge so orders.
(b) Contents. The answer must address the allegations in the motion.
III
Judge Skavdah’s Order to Dismiss is saying there is no substantial showing of the denial of Doty’s constitutional right of liberty within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253(c)(2). This is because marijuana is not a fundamental right.
Doty’s Ground One of his § 2255 Motion to Vacate has nothing to do with claiming marijuana is a fundamental right. Ground One is about Doty right of liberty, freedom from physical restraint by incarceration seeking habeas relief.
This was about Doty’s constitutional right of due process of law being willfully denied. Doty has a constitutional right to know the compelling reasons for Congress to proscribe marijuana that deprived him of his liberty, freedom from physical restraint.
Judge Skavdah ignores the fact that criminal (marijuana) laws are an Article III case and controversy. He ignores the fact that the operation and effects of government police power is the seizure of person and deprivation of the constitutional right of liberty. Denies Doty has suffered actual injury by the government.
The court documents is all the F.B.I. needs to prove a crime has been committed, a clear violation Title 18 U.S.C. § 242.
Judge Skavdah violated his solemn oath to the Constitution by ignoring the allegation of Ground One in Doty’s § 2255 Motion to Vacate.
Being incarcerated, deprived of liberty, is a denial of a constitutional right. If the government is to respond to the allegations in the § 2255 Motion to vacate, an impartial court should also do so.
I am filing this 18 U.S.C. 242 criminal complaint against Scott W. Skavdah, Wyoming
3 of 4
United States District Judge. because Stewart Miles Doty is a victim of his
crime.
The deprivation of Doty’s constitutional right of liberty, freedom from physical restraint, without due process of law for political reasons, under the color of law is a clear violation Title 18 U.S.C. 242.
As the federal marijuana laws stand, under the color of law, there is no equal justice under the law. Justice is not the guardian of liberty. Liberty and justice for all is a lie. The original meaning of liberty is not a constitutional right, freedom from physical restraint.
"All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. "Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address In Washington, D.C. Wednesday, March 4, 1801 “
One's right to life, liberty, and property . . . may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections. West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 638 1943
Acknowledgment with a case number of this criminal complaint is expected.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael J. Dee
29 Hillcrest St.
Augusta Maine 04330
(207) 894-0319
mjdeeour4th@outlook.com
https://www.ursm.us/article-iii-courts/
P.S. You can access the court documents at PACER. https://pacer.uscourts.gov/
4 of 4
Print 