UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Case No. 3:17-CR-00435-JO-1
JODY TREMAYNE WAFER
Document 258 Filed 12/15/2020
28 U.S.C. 2255 Motion to Vacate
P.3 Ground One Mr. Wafer is in custody in violation of Amendments IV and V of the Constitution of the United States. He is being deprived of his liberty, without compelling reasons for Congress to proscribe marijuana therefore without due process of law.
P.6 Relief: To declare liberty is freedom from physical restraint and the U.S. Congress proscribing marijuana as a controlled substance was arbitrary and unreasonable regulation of property, depriving Mr. Wafer's liberty without compelling reasons, without due process of law violating Amends. IV. V of the U.S. Constitution thus vacating both convictions.
Document 264 Filed 02/04/21
RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S $2255 MOTION
Pg. 5. Those criminal statutes are constitutional.
Pg. 5Court should reexamine Congress' decision, apply strict scrutiny, and strike the statute is contrary to long-established law. There is no constitutional right to sell marijuana.
Pg. 5 (*The district court properly concluded that the placement of marijuana in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act satisfies rational basis review') Congress had sufficiently rationale reasons for including Marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance.”
February 4, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
BILLY J. WII,LIAMS United States Attorney
/s/ AMY E. POTTER Assistant United States Attorney
Document 267 Filed 03/26/21
ORDER AND ORDER
Pg. 3-4 In effect, Defendant ask this court to determine whether he has a fundamental right to use, sell, or possess marijuana without facing incarceration."
Pg. 4 “Because there is no fundamental right to distribute marijuana, this court applies the rational basis standard of review,”
Pg. 6 Defendant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct his Sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255, ECF No.258, is DENIED.
03/26/2255 Robert E. Jones United States District Judge
Document 269 Judgment
“The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because Defendant has not *made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. 2253(c ) (2).
Dated 3/29/2021 Robert E. Jones, United State District Court.
Ground One of his 2255 Motion to vacate has nothing to do with claiming marijuana is a fundamental right. This about his right of liberty, freedom from physical restraint by seeking habeas relief. This was about his constitutional right of due process of law being denied. Knowing the compelling reasons to proscribe marijuana that deprived him of his liberty, freedom from physical restraint. There are none. No victim. Political crime.
Under the color of law, the signers of these legal papers have willfully declared that being incarcerated in a federal prison is not a substantial showing of a concrete denial of his constitutional right, liberty. This is because marijuana is not a fundamental right.
The signers violated their solemn oath to Amendment IV that places constitutional limitation to government police power to be reasonable and necessary to protect the rights of others and not political. ere's where you can enter in text. Feel free to edit, move, delete or add a different page element.