Smith v. United States

CourtDistrict Court, M.D. Florida
DecidedApril 30, 2025
Docket8:25-cv-01065
StatusUnknown

This text of Smith v. United States (Smith v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Smith v. United States, (M.D. Fla. 2025).

Opinion

UMNIIDTDEDLE S TDAISTTERSI DCTIS OTRF IFCLTO CROIDUAR T TAMPA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 8:05-cr-527-SDM-AEP 8:25-cv-1065-SDM-AEP

BRYAN TIMOTHYLEENARD SMITH,

____________________________________/

ORDER The clerk opened this civil action upon receipt of a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which was filed by a non-attorney putatively acting on behalf of Bryan Timothyleenard Smith. (Civ. Doc. 1) In 2006, a jury found Smith guilty of one count of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery, two counts of Hobbs Act robbery, one count of attempted Hobbs Act robbery, and three counts of using a firearm during a crime of violence. (Crim. Docs. 81 and 82) Smith serves a sentence of 140 years’ imprisonment. (Crim. Doc. 115) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) requires that “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed . . . by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” Similarly, Rule 2(b)(5) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts requires that a motion filed under that section “be signed under penalty of perjury by the movant or by a person authorized to sign it for the movant.” Smith has not signed this motion. A non-attorney third party cannot proceed on behalf of a litigant. See 28 U.S.C. § 1654 (stating that “parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel”); Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499 (1975) (stating that a “plaintiff generally must assert his own legal rights and interests and cannot rest his claim to relief on the legal rights or interests of third parties”). The motion to vacate is signed by Brittany A. Fields, who describes herself as “an advocate acting in good faith on behalf of Bryan Timothy Smith.” (Civ. Doc. 1-3 at 1) Fields is not a lawyer, and she neglects to explain her authority to move on Smith’s behalf. Accordingly, the clerk must DENY the motion (Civ. Doc. 1) as unauthorized, close this action, and enter a copy of this order in the criminal action. The clerk must mail a copy of this order to Smith at his current place of incarceration at FCI Coleman Medium. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on April 30, 2025.

STEVEND.MERRYDAY __ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-

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

Related

Warth v. Seldin
422 U.S. 490 (Supreme Court, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Smith v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-united-states-flmd-2025.