Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Galeas v. Perry

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina

February 18, 2015

JORGE GALEAS, JR., Petitioner,
v.
FRANK PERRY, Respondent.

ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

L. PATRICK AULD, Magistrate Judge.

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of North Carolina, submitted a document entitled as a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Motions brought under § 2255 attack federal sentences, but Petitioner seeks to attack his state court criminal conviction, not any federal conviction. Therefore, the document he filed is not a recognizable method for achieving his goal. Instead, the proper avenue for such an attack is ordinarily a petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. For this reason, the Court will construe the submission as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in state custody. For the following reasons, the Petition cannot be further processed:

1. The filing fee was not received, nor was an affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis submitted and signed by Petitioner.
2. Petitioner has not used the required § 2254 Forms. Rule 2, R. Gov. § 2254 Cases. The Clerk will forward to Petitioner the proper forms.
3. Petitioner does not appear to state any proper claim for relief. His claims and brief are rambling and confusing, but he relies on his nationality or ethnicity to attack his state court conviction. Such factors do not absolve a person of criminal liability. Petitioner also relies on commercial law, which is generally inapplicable in attacking a criminal conviction.

Because of these pleading failures, the Petition will be filed and then dismissed, without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new petition on the proper habeas corpus forms with the $5.00 filing fee, or a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, and otherwise correcting the defects noted.[1] The Court has no authority to toll the statute of limitation, therefore it continues to run, and Petitioner must act quickly if he wishes to pursue this Petition. See Spencer v. Sutton, 239 F.3d 626 (4th Cir. 2001). To further aid Petitioner, the Clerk is instructed to send Petitioner a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, new § 2254 forms, and instructions for filing a § 2254 petition, which Petitioner should follow.

In forma pauperis status will be granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation of dismissal with permission to file a new petition which corrects the defects of the present Petition.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that in forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation. The Clerk is instructed to send Petitioner § 2254 forms, instructions, and a current application to proceed in forma pauperis .

IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be construed as a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new petition which corrects the defects of the current Petition. The new petition must be accompanied by either the five dollar filing fee or a current application to proceed in forma pauperis .


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.