Hernandez v. United States

• Court: District Court, E.D. Washington
• Decided: January 21, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00415
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 FILED IN THE 2 EASTERU N. S D. I SD TI RS IT CR TI C OT F C WO AU SR HT I NGTON 3 Jan 21, 2025 4 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 9 10 BRYAN PAUL HERNANDEZ (also No. 2:24-CV-00415-SAB 11 known as Selene Violet Henderson), 12 Petitioner, ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING 13 v. PETITION 14 15 U.S.; and ERIC CARPENTER, 16 Respondents. 17 18 Petitioner, a civilly committed detainee currently housed at the Eastern State 19 Hospital, brought this pro se “Petition to Withdraw U.S. Citizenship (42 U.S.C. § 20 2241), which was opened as a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. 21 § 2241 on December 12, 2024. ECF No. 1. The $5.00 filing fee was paid. Id. 22 Respondents have not been served. 23 The cited statutory provision, 42 U.S.C. § 2241, is titled, “Atomic safety and 24 licensing boards; establishment; membership; functions; compensation”. The 25 Court cannot discern how this, or any other statutory provision, authorizes this 26 Court to entertain Petitioner’s request to “withdraw U.S. Citizenship.” 27 Petitioner seems to admit an inability to “meet the statutory requirements” to 28 withdraw “citizenship to the U.S.” due to Petitioner’s present confinement and an 1 inability to “pay the large fee to revoke her citizenship.” Id. at 1. Petitioner seeks a 2 competency evaluation, pro bono counsel, and transportation to and from a U.S. 3 Embassy. Id. at 1–2. Petitioner cites no authority, and the Court is aware of none, 4 which would permit this Court to rule on Petitioner’s request to relinquish U.S. 5 nationality. 6 Petitioner indicates a request has been made to a social worker, and 7 Petitioner is awaiting a response before filing a complaint “through the hospital 8 complaint system if asking her about it does not go well.” Id. at 2. Petitioner also 9 seeks arrangements to obtain a passport and to notify Petitioner’s court-appointed 10 guardian. Id. Petitioner indicates this will render Petitioner a “citizen of the globe,” 11 also referred to as “Sovereign Citizenship.” Id. Petitioner pledges to “obey every 12 law” and learn from “numerous past failures.” Id. Again, Petitioner cites no 13 authority, and this Court has found none, permitting this Court to entertain 14 Petitioner’s requests. 15 In addition, Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of a Washington 16 statutory provision, Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.320(4)(c)(ii), which has apparently 17 been used to civilly commit Petitioner for having committed a violent felony 18 offense, citing the dissent of Justice Gordon McCloud in “M.W. v. D.S.H.S., 185 19 Wash. 2d 633 (2016).” Id. at 2. It is not the province of a federal court in a habeas 20 corpus proceeding to consider challenges to state law. See Peltier v. Wright, 15 21 F.3d 860, 861–62 (9th Cir. 1994) (noting that generally federal habeas corpus is 22 unavailable for alleged errors in interpretation and application of state law). 23 This Court is bound by a state court’s interpretation of state law unless the 24 state court’s interpretation is untenable or amounts to an “obvious subterfuge” to 25 avoid federal review of a constitutional violation. See Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U.S. 26 684, 691 & n.11 (1975) (quotation omitted); Butler v. Curry, 528 F.3d 624, 642 27 (9th Cir. 2008); cf. Taylor v. Kincheloe, 920 F.2d 599, 609 (9th Cir. 1990) 28 (state instructional errors become federal constitutional issues if they rendered the trial fundamentally unfair). No such subterfuge is apparent from Petitioner’s 2|| assertions. It plainly appears that Petitioner is not entitled to relief in this Court at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 5 1. The Petition, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. 8 2. The Court certifies that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A certificate of appealability is therefore DENIED. 11 IT ISSO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court shall enter this Order, enter judgment, provide copies to Petitioner, and close the file. 13 DATED this 21st day of January 2025. 14 15 16 17 ‘ 18 5 fo £ 74 hai, 19 Stanley A. Bastian 20 Chief United States District Judge 21 22) 23 24 25 26 27 28

ADTAUD CTININT ADIT XU TION ITOCTIRIA DETITIAPLT O45