Broussard v. United States of America
ORDER. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus of petitioner Aaron Rhy Broussard [Doc. No. 1] is denied. Broussard's application to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2] is denied. It is certified that any appeal taken from this dismissal would not be in good faith and that Broussard therefore will not be granted in forma pauperis status on appeal. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Susan Richard Nelson on 11/18/2021. (SMD)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Aaron Rhy Broussard,
Case No. 21-CV-2484 (SRN/LIB)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
United States of America,
SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, United States District Judge
Petitioner Aaron Rhy Broussard has been charged with multiple drug-related
offenses and is currently awaiting trial in this District. See United States v. Broussard,
No. 19-CR-0101 (SRN/KMM). In the petition for a writ of habeas corpus now before the
Court, Broussard challenges the legality of that prosecution and seeks immediate release
from his pretrial confinement. The Court has reviewed the habeas petition pursuant to
Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts and,
finding the petition to be without merit, will deny the petition. 1
There are two problems with Broussard’s petition. The first problem is procedural:
“Courts have consistently refused to exercise their habeas authority in cases where federal
prisoners have sought relief before standing trial. Instead, Courts have long stressed that
Broussard’s habeas petition is not brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, but the
Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases may nevertheless be applied to his petition. See
defendants should pursue the remedies available within the criminal action.” Reese v.
Warden Philadelphia FDC, 904 F.3d 244, 246 (3d Cir. 2018) (collecting cases); accord
Medina v. Choate, 875 F.3d 1025, 1029 (10th Cir. 2017) (holding that a petition for a writ
of habeas corpus brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 “is not a proper avenue of relief for
federal prisoners awaiting federal trial.”); Williams v. Hackman, 364 F. App’x 268, 268
(7th Cir. 2010) (“[A] federal pretrial detainee cannot use § 2241 to preempt the judge
presiding over the criminal case.”). The proper vehicle for Broussard’s attacks on the
indictment in his criminal case is through a challenge brought in that case.
The second problem is substantive: Broussard has already raised each of the claims
presented in his habeas petition through motions to dismiss the criminal indictment, and
each of those claims has already been found to be without merit. See Broussard, No. 19CR-0101, Doc. No. 69 (D. Minn. Sept. 15, 2021) (order denying motion to dismiss). The
Court has already explained at length why it believes the claims raised in Broussard’s
habeas petition are not meritorious. That the claims are now presented by Broussard
through a habeas petition rather than a motion to dismiss the indictment does not change
Accordingly, the habeas petition will be denied pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules
Governing Section 2254 Cases.
Because the petition will be summarily denied,
Broussard’s pending application to proceed in forma pauperis will also be denied. See
Kruger v. Erickson, 77 F.3d 1071, 1074 n.3 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finally, the Court
concludes that an appeal could not be taken in good faith from this dismissal and therefore
certifies that any application from Broussard for in forma pauperis status on appeal from
this dismissal would be denied. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) (“An appeal may not be taken
in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.”).
Based on the submissions and the entire file and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus of petitioner Aaron Rhy Broussard
[Doc. No. 1] is denied.
Broussard’s application to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2] is
It is certified that any appeal taken from this dismissal would not be in good
faith and that Broussard therefore will not be granted in forma pauperis status on appeal.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: November 18, 2021
s/Susan Richard Nelson
SUSAN RICHARD NELSON
United States District Judge
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?