Newcomb v. Angol

Filing 15

ORDER dismissing 1 Petition; denying as moot 14 Motion for 90-Day Extension of Time to Answer. See order for details. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter a Final Judgment in this case. Signed by Judge Sharon L. Gleason on 3/10/2025. (SCD, COURT STAFF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

BRYANT PATRICK NEWCOMB,
v.

Petitioner,
Case No. 3:24-cv-00125-SLG

S. ANGOL, Superintendent,
Respondent.

ORDER ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241
Before the Court at Docket 1 is Bryant Patrick Newcomb’s Petition for a Writ
of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. As relief, Petitioner seeks a reduction
in his state court sentence. 1 Appointed counsel for Petitioner declined to file an
amended petition. 2 This Court previously granted Respondent an extension of
time to file a response, and a second motion for an extension of time by
Respondent is pending before the Court. 3
BACKGROUND
The Court takes judicial notice 4 of Mr. Newcomb’s pending state court

1

Docket 1 at 8.

2

Docket 10.

3

Docket 14.

Judicial notice is the “court’s acceptance, for purposes of convenience and without requiring a
party’s proof, of a well-known and indisputable fact; the court’s power to accept such a fact.”
BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY (11th ed. 2019); see United States ex rel. Robinson Rancheria
Citizens Council v. Borneo, Inc., 971 F.2d 244, 248 (9th Cir. 1992) ("We may take notice of
4

criminal case, State of Alaska v. Bryant Patrick Newcomb, Case No. 3PA-2001693CR. 5 An initial charging document was filed against Mr. Newcomb in that
case in 2020, and he was arraigned in March 2021. 6
In November 2022, Mr. Newcomb filed a § 2241 petition in this Court alleging
that he had not been arraigned until 78 days after his arrest, that he had been held
without a court hearing since his arraignment, and that the State had scheduled,
held, and continued over a dozen hearings without his knowledge or presence. 7
He also maintained that his speedy trial rights had been violated. 8 For relief in that
case, Mr. Newcomb requested that his pending state court case be dismissed. 9
This Court dismissed that petition because Mr. Newcomb had not named a proper
respondent and because Younger abstention precluded the Court from enjoining
the state court prosecution. 10
A review of the state court record indicates that on May 30, 2024, Mr.
Newcomb pled guilty in that case, a representation hearing was held on November
proceedings in other courts, both within and without the federal judicial system, if those
proceedings have a direct relation to matters at issue") (internal citations and quotation marks
omitted.).
Publicly available state court records may be searched at https://courts.alaska.gov/main/searchcases.htm (last visited March 7, 2025).
5

6

State v. Newcomb, Case No. 3PA-20-01693CR, Event & Docket.

7

Docket 1 at 6-9 (Case No. 3:22-cv-00260-SLG).

8

Docket 1 at 10 (Case No. 3:22-cv-00260-SLG).

9

Docket 1 at 8 (Case No. 3:22-cv-00260-SLG).

10

Docket 5 (Case No. 3:22-cv-00260-SLG).

Case No. 3:24-cv-125, Newcomb v. Angol
Order on Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Page 2 of 5

25, 2024, a new attorney entered an appearance in Mr. Newcomb’s state criminal
case on December 16, 2024, and a status hearing is currently scheduled for March
11, 2025. 11 Mr. Newcomb has not been sentenced, and it appears that no date
for sentencing has been set.
In his current petition, Mr. Newcomb maintains that the State (1) denied him
a bail hearing and has not adjusted bail or reviewed his financial ability; (2)
scheduled, held, and continued approximately 18 hearings without his presence or
consent; (3) failed to arraign him until 78 days after his arrest; and (4) denied his
pro se request for a representation hearing. 12
SCREENING REQUIREMENT
Federal courts have general habeas corpus jurisdiction pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241. 13 “[D]istrict courts are expected to take ‘an active role in summarily
disposing of facially defective habeas petitions.’” 14 “[I]f it ‘plainly appears from the
petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the
district court, the judge must dismiss the petition and direct the clerk to notify the
petitioner.’” 15
11

State v. Newcomb, Case No. 3PA-20-01693CR, Event & Docket.

12

Docket 1 at 6-8.

13

Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466, 473 (2004).

Pinson v. Carvajal, 69 F.4th 1059, 1065 (9th Cir. 2023) (quoting Boyd v. Thompson, 147 F.3d
1124, 1127 (9th Cir. 1998)).
14

Id. (quoting Rule 4(b), Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings for the United States District
Courts); see also Rule 1(b), Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings for the United States
District Courts (providing that a “district court may apply any or all of these rules to a habeas

15

Case No. 3:24-cv-125, Newcomb v. Angol
Order on Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Page 3 of 5

DISCUSSION
“When a criminal defendant has solemnly admitted in open court that he is
in fact guilty of the offense with which he is charged, he may not thereafter raise
independent claims relating to the deprivation of constitutional rights that occurred
prior to the entry of the guilty plea.” 16 He may only challenge the knowing and
voluntary nature of his plea or the effectiveness of counsel’s assistance. 17
Mr. Newcomb’s first, second, and third claims must be dismissed because,
by pleading guilty, he has waived any purported non-jurisdictional defects in the
state court criminal proceedings. His current petition does not allege an infirmity
in his guilty plea in state court nor does it allege ineffective assistance of counsel.
Further, the Court dismissed Mr. Newcomb’s previous petition raising claims
nearly identical to claims one, two, and three in the instant petition. The same
rationale the Court applied to find that Younger abstention precluded the Court
from granting Mr. Newcomb’s requested relief in his first petition applies equally
here. In addition, Mr. Newcomb seeks a sentence reduction, but he has yet to be
sentenced by the state court.
Finally, with respect to Mr. Newcomb’s fourth claim in this petition, the state
court docket shows that Mr. Newcomb was granted a representation hearing after
corpus petition not covered by Rule 1(a)”; Rule 1(a) covers 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petitions).
Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, 267 (1973); see United States v. Bohn, 956 F.2d 208, 209
(9th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (“A defendant's guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional defect claims.”).
16

17

Tollett, 411 U.S. at 267.

Case No. 3:24-cv-125, Newcomb v. Angol
Order on Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Page 4 of 5

he filed this petition, and a new attorney has appeared on Mr. Newcomb’s behalf
in the state court proceeding. Therefore, he has already received the relief his
sought from this Court on that claim.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1. The Petition at Docket 1 is DISMISSED because “it ‘plainly appears from
the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to
relief.’” 18
2. Respondent’s pending Motion for 90-Day Extension of Time to File
Answer at Docket 14 is DENIED AS MOOT.
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter a Final Judgment in this case.
4. A Certificate of Appealability shall not issue. 19
DATED this 10th day of March, 2025, at Anchorage, Alaska.
/s/ Sharon L. Gleason
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Pinson, 69 F.4th at 1065 (quoting Rule 4(b), Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings for the
United States District Courts).
18

28 U.S.C. §§ 2255(d), 2253(c)(2). See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (certificate
of appealability may be granted only if applicant made a “substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right,” i.e., a showing that “reasonable jurists could debate whether . . . the petition
should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were adequate to
deserve encouragement to proceed further” (internal quotations and citations omitted)).
19

Case No. 3:24-cv-125, Newcomb v. Angol
Order on Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Page 5 of 5