Brown El Bey v. Wesley et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge Gregory M. Sleet on 10/9/14. (mas)

Download PDF
. I • IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MARQUIS BROWN EL-BEY, Petitioner, v. STEVEN WESLEY, Warden, and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 14-1035-GMS ) Respondents. ) MEMORANDUM I. BACKGROUND Presently pending before the court is petitioner Marquis Brown-El-Bey's ("Brown-El- Bey") petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Brown-El-Bey appears to be challenging his conviction for several drug-related charges on the ground that the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction to convict him because he is a "Moorish American." (D.I. 2 at 2-3) II. DISCUSSION A district court judge may summarily dismiss a habeas application "if it plainly appears from the face of the petition and any exhibits annexed to it that the petitioner is not entitled to relief." Rule 4, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. Although not entirely clear, Brown-El-Bey appears to assert that he is immune from the laws of the United States because he is a Moorish citizen and, therefore, his conviction should be reversed and he should be released from his incarceration in a Delaware correctional institution. This argument has no basis in law or fact. Regardless of Brown-El-Bey's nationality or religion, he is subject to the laws of the jurisdiction in which he resides. See Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District . . Court, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254 (authorizing summary dismissal of§ 2254 applications); see, e.g., Jones-Bey v. Alabama, 2014 WL 1233826, at *3 (N.D. Ala. Mar. 25, 2014)("There is no basis in the law for such a claim" that the State of Alabama did not have jurisdiction to prosecute and imprison petitioner based on his ancestry as a "Moorish American."); Bey v. Bailey, 2010 WL 1531172, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 15, 2010)("the suggestion that Petitioner is entitled to ignore the laws of the State ofNew York by claiming membership in the Moorish-American nation is without merit and cannot be the basis for habeas relief."); Osiris v. Brown, 2005 WL 2044904, at *2-*3 (D. N.J. Aug. 24, 2005); see also Byrd v. Blackman, 2006 WL 2924446, at * 1 n.1 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2006)(explaining the background ofthe Moorish beliefs). Notably, Brown-El-Bey does not assert any other challenge to his state court convictions. Therefore, the court will summarily dismiss the instant petition because Brown-El-Bey has failed to assert a basis for federal habeas relief. IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the court will summarily dismiss Brown-El-Bey's petition for federal habeas relief. The court will also decline to issue a certificate of appealability because Brown-El-Bey has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); 3d Cir. L.A.R. 22.2 (2011); United States v. Eyer, 113 F.3d 470 (3d Cir. 1997). A separate order will be entered. 0_~-=-----' 2014 Dated: _ _ 2

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?