Mnuk v. State of Texas

Filing 20

ORDER that Lee County's 11 Motion to Remand is GRANTED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Lee County's 12 Motion to Dismiss DISMISSED AS MOOT. IT IS FiNALLY ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Justice Court, Precinct 2, Lee County, Texas, under Docket No. 20141608. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (klw)

F LE0

I
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
2015 JUL 16 AM
AUSTIN DIVISION

CLE
WESTEF

FRANK MNUK,

J::

8:

33

I

Plaintiff,
Case No. A-14-CA-1128-SS

-vs-

STATE OF TEXAS,

Defendant.

ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and

specifically the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge [#17], to which
Mnuk did not file objections, Lee County's Motion to Remand [#11], and Lee County's Motion to
Dismiss [#12]. Having considered the documents, the file as a whole, and the governing law, the
Court now enters the following opinion and orders.
All matters in this case were referred to United States Magistrate Judge Andrew W. Austin
for report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§

636(b) and Rule

1

of Appendix C of the

Local Court Rules of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Local Rules

for the Assignment ofDuties to United States Magistrate Judges. Mnuk is entitled to de novo review

of the portions of the Magistrate Judge's report to which he filed specific objections. 28 U.S.C.
§

636(b)(1). All other review is for plain error.

Starns

v.

Andrews,

524 F.3d 612, 617 (5th Cir.

2008). Nevertheless, this Court has reviewed the entire file de novo, and agrees with the Magistrate

Judge's recommendation.

j

Background
On July 17, 2014, Plaintiff Frank Mnuk received a speeding ticket from a Texas Department

of Public Safety officer while driving through Lee County, Texas. In a remarkable demonstration
of tenacity, Mnuk has since flooded both this Court and the Justice Court, Precinct 2 of Lee County,
Texas, with incomprehensible filings in an apparent attempt to avoid paying the ticket. Among many

other passionate and irrelevant urgings, Mnuk asserts he: is "not the fictitious 'person' named

MNUK, JOSEPH with all capital letters"; is "a living breathing human, sovereign being"; and has

"the God-given right to travel down a public highway," apparently at whatever speed the Lord sees
fit.

Unmoved by Mnuk's protestations and assertions of divine right, the Justice Court cited
Mnuk for failure to appear after Mnuk pled not guilty to the speeding charge, requested a jury trial,
and then neglected to show up for a subsequent hearing. Mnuk then attempted to remove the

speeding case to this Court by filing his "Counter Claim in the Form of an Affidavit Challenging
Jurisdiction and Notice of Removal" [#1]. Lee County thereafter filed a motion to remand and a
motion to dismiss, attaching the state court records.

Analysis
Only a very small class of criminal cases are removable to federal court: (1) actions against
federal law enforcement officers or officials for acts taken in performance of their official duties;
(2) prosecutions

of members of the armed forces; (3) prosecutions against officials for acts or

refusals to act under civil rights statutes; and (4) suits "[a]gainst any person who is denied or cannot
enforce" in the state courts "a right under any law providing for the equal civil rights of citizens of
the United States."

See

28 U.S.C.

§§

1442, 1 442a, 1443. As there is no indication Mnuk is a federal

-2-

law enforcement officer, a member of the armed forces, or an official enforcing a civil rights statute,

the question is whether Mnuk is a "person who is denied or cannot enforce" before the Justice Court,
Precinct 2, of Lee County, Texas, "a right under any law providing for the equal civil rights of
citizens of the United States." 28 U.S.C.

§

1443(1).

A defendant attempting to remove a case under § 1443(1) must show both that: "(1) the right

allegedly denied that defendant arises under a federal law providing for specific rights stated in terms

of racial equality; and (2) the removal petitioner is denied or cannot enforce the specified federal
rights in the state courts due to some formal expression of state law." Oliver v. Lewis, 891 F. Supp.
2d 839, 844 (S.D. Tex. 2012) (citing Texas v. Gulf Water Benefaction Co., 679 F.2d 85, 86 (5th Cir.
1982)). Mnuk's notice of removal plainly fails. Mnuk is not a racial minority, see State Court

Records [#13-1] at 12 (speeding ticket identifying Mnuk as a white male), and has not alleged the

violation of any civil rights laws related to racial equality. Accordingly, this Court lacks jurisdiction
over this case, and remand is appropriate.

Conclusion
Accordingly:
IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge [#17] is ACCEPTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Lee County's Motion to Remand [#11] is

GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Lee County's Motion to Dismiss [#12] is

DISMISSED AS MOOT; and

-3-

IT IS FiNALLY ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Justice Court,

Precinct 2, Lee County, Texas, under Docket No. 20141608.
SIGNED this the

/,

day of July 2015.

SAM SPARKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1128 rrokba.frrn