In re Smith-Bey

Fourth Circuit

In re Smith-Bey

635 F. App'x 140

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 31, 2016·No. No. 15-2571·Published

Opinion

Petition dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Charles Arnell Smith-Bey petitions this court for an original writ of habeas corpus, asserting that as a Moorish National he is not subject to the laws or jurisdiction of this country. This court ordinarily declines to entertain original habeas corpus petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012), and this case provides no reason to depart from the general rule. Moreover, we conclude that the interests of justice would not be served by transferring the case to the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (2012). Accordingly, we grant Smith-Bey’s motions to amend or correct his petition, deny Smith-Bey leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Petition dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Charles Arnell Smith-Bey petitions this court for an original writ of habeas corpus, asserting that as a Moorish National he is not subject to the laws or jurisdiction of this country. This court ordinarily declines to entertain original habeas corpus petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012), and this case provides no reason to depart from the general rule. Moreover, we conclude that the interests of justice would not be served by transferring the case to the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (2012). Accordingly, we grant Smith-Bey’s motions to amend or correct his petition, deny Smith-Bey leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DISMISSED.

In re Smith-Bey, 635 F. App'x 140 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

635 F. App'x 140 (In re Smith-Bey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related