Bussie v. USA
ORDER dismissing this action without prejudice by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 2/4/14. (dkals, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00282-BNB
Plaintiff (named as Movant),
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Mr. Bussie, who is detained at the Federal Detention Center in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, has filed pro se a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (Doc. No. 1).1 In the motion, Mr. Bussie alleges that
Congressmen Andrews and Boehner are “using white collar crimes . . . to torture Bussie
. . . .” (ECF No. 1, at 10). His other allegations are unintelligible.
The Court’s review of the Federal Judiciary Public Access to Court Electronic
Records (“PACER”) Service reveals that Mr. Bussie is presently in custody pursuant to
a federal indictment charging him with threatening to harm a United States
Congressman.2 See United States v. Bussie, No. 12-cr-00229-RMB-1 (D.N.J.). The
The Clerk of the Court was directed to open this case as a civil rights action because a § 2255
Motion must be linked to a criminal case filed in this Court and Mr. Bussie has not been convicted in the
District of Colorado. Further, as discussed in the text above, the allegations in the Motion are not
cognizable under § 2255 or in habeas corpus.
“[T]he court is permitted to take judicial notice of its own files and records, as well as facts which
are a matter of public record." Van Woudenberg ex rel. Foor v. Gibson, 211 F.3d 560, 568 (10th
Cir.2000), abrogated on other grounds by McGregor v. Gibson, 248 F.3d 946, 955 (10th Cir. 2001); see
also Duhart v. Carlson, 469 F.2d 471 (10th Cir. 1972).
criminal action has been continued indefinitely to assess Mr. Bussie’s psychological
condition and need for medication. (Id.).
A motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 attacks a criminal conviction or sentence and
must be filed in the sentencing court. Haugh v. Booker, 210 F.3d 1147, 1150 (10th Cir.
2000); Bradshaw v. Story, 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir. 1996). Mr. Bussie’s § 2255
motion is not properly filed in the District of Colorado because he is not attacking a
criminal conviction or sentence imposed by this Court.
Jurisdictional defects that arise when a suit is filed in the wrong federal district
may be cured by transfer under the federal transfer statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1631, which
requires a court to transfer such an action “if the transfer is in the interest of justice.”
Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. McGlamery, 74 F.3d 218, 220 (10th Cir.1996). The Court
finds that transfer of the § 2255 motion to the United States District Court for the District
of New Jersey is not warranted for two reasons. First, the motion seeking postconviction relief is premature. Mr. Bussie has not yet been convicted on the charges
filed in 12-cr-00229-RMB-1 (D.N.J.). Second, the motion contains allegations of
purported illegal conduct by Congressmen that are not cognizable in a motion for relief
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Bussie v. Andrews, No. 3:13-cv-01536-AWT (D. Conn.
Nov. 27, 2013) (§ 2255 motion filed in wrong federal court and which contained
allegations of unlawful actions by Congressman Andrews dismissed without prejudice).
Mr. Bussie’s other allegations are unintelligible. Transferring a § 2255 motion is not in
the interest of justice where the requested relief is meritless. See Haugh, 210 F.3d at
1150. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, filed by Anthony Bussie on January 29, 2014, is DENIED, and this
action is DISMISSED without prejudice. (Doc. No. 1).
Dated February 4, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?