Jones v. Sachse
Filing
4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis Doc. # 2 is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED as DUPLICATIVE and SUCCESSIVE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall substitute Jennifer Sachse as respondent in this action. A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 4/24/14. (ARL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
RAFAEL A. JONES, SR.,
Petitioner,
v.
JENNIFER SACHSE1,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:14CV763 TCM
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on petitioner=s submission of an application for writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2254. The petition will be summarily dismissed.
Rule 4 of the Rules Governing ' 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts provides
that a district court shall summarily dismiss a ' 2254 petition if it plainly appears that the petitioner
is not entitled to relief.
In the instant petition, petitioner attempts to challenge three State of Missouri
convictions: State v. Jones, 07SL-CR03429-01 (21st Jud. Cir.); State v. Jones, 07SL-CR06638
(21st Jud. Cir.); and State v. Jones, 0822-CR07366 (22nd Jud. Cir.). Petitioner has previously
brought challenges to each of these convictions in this Court. See Jones v. Norman, 4:12CV617
AGF (E.D. Mo.); Jones v. Norman, 4:12CV569 CDP (E.D. Mo.); Jones v. Prudden, 4:11CV1310
LMB (E.D. Mo.); Jones v. Moriorty, 4:10CV495 LMB (E.D. Mo.).
1 Petitioner has named as respondent Barack Hussein Obama. The proper respondent for a
prisoner currently in custody pursuant to a state court judgment is the state officer having custody
of the applicant. See 28 U.S.C. ' 2254, Rule 2(a). Jennifer Sachse, Warden of Missouri Eastern
Correctional Center, the facility at which petitioner is currently incarcerated, is the proper
respondent in this action.
The petition is duplicative and successive. As a result, petitioner may not proceed without
authorization from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which he does not have. See 28 U.S.C. '
2244(b). The Court will therefore dismiss the petition without further proceedings.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner=s motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc.
#2] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner=s application for writ of habeas corpus is
DENIED and DISMISSED as DUPLICATIVE and SUCCESSIVE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall substitute Jennifer Sachse as
respondent in this action.
A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.
Dated this 24th day of April, 2014.
RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?