Brown v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION. SEE OPINION FOR COMPLETE DETAILS. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 12/14/2017. Copy of this Memorandum Opinion was mailed to Plaintiff.(ccol, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
°
"
L
Richmond Division
DEC I42017 [j
DARRELL WAYNE BROWN,
CLERK, U S. D,' I fiiCT COURT
RICHMOND. VA
Plaintiff,
V.
Civil Action No. 3:17CV71
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Darrell
filed
this
Wayne
Bivens
Brown,
a
action.^
federal
The
inmate
matter
is
evaluation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
proceeding
before
the
pro
se,
Court
for
For the reasons set for
below, the Court will dismiss the action as legally frivolous.
I.
Pursuant
to the
Court must dismiss
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Prison Litigation Reform Act
any action filed by a
determines the action
(1)
"is frivolous"
claim on which relief may be granted."
The
first
meritless
standard
legal
includes
claims
theory,'"
or
417,
427
(E.D.
Va.
1992)
or
"fails to state a
Named
v.
Agents
§ 1915A(b) (1) .
"'an indisputably
where
Clay v.
(quoting Neitzke
^ Bivens v.
Six Unknown
Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
(2)
28 U.S.C.
claims
this
prisoner if the Court
based upon
contentions are clearly baseless.'"
("PLRA")
the
Yates,
809
Williams,
of
"'factual
Fed.
F.
Supp.
490 U.S.
Bureau
of
319,
327
{1989)).
The second standard is the familiar standard
for a motion to dismiss under Fed. R.
Civ.
P.
12(b)(6).
While the Court liberally construes pro se complaints, Gordon
V•
Leeke,
the
574 F.2d 1147, 1151 {4th Cir. 1978),
inmate's
advocate,
constitutional
claims
the
face of his complaint.
(4th
Cir.
1997)
sua
inmate
(Luttig,
J.,
II.
January
25,
2017,
("Complaint," ECF No. 1.)^
sections.
In
(See id.
the
developing
failed
See Brock v.
Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1278
On
sponte
to
raise
and
on
the
107 F.3d 241,
Carroll,
243
Beaudett
v.
City
of
(4th Cir. 1985).
BROWN'S COMPLAINT
Brown
submitted
this
civil
action.
Brown's Complaint consists of several
at 2.)
first
section
of
Brown's
Complaint,
"Rule
8(E)."
he
provides
a
wherein he notifies the Court of
his "absolute ministerial right" to make a
to
statutory
clearly
concurring);
"Special Notice to the Court,"
pursuant
it does not act as
(Id.
at
3.)
"restricted appearance"
Brown
then
identifies
himself as
a
real
flesh
and blood man,
a
Commonwealth
citizen
and
inhabitant of the County of Norfolk,
Virginia,
by
special visitation in propria personam, not general to
present this, his notice and demand for written proof
(verified
and
demonstrated
evidence)
of
jurisdiction
^ The Court employs the pagination assigned to Brown's
submission by the CM/ECF docketing system.
The Court omits the
emphasis and corrects the capitalization in the quotations from
Brown's Complaint.
over his proper person and over the subject matter in
the above entitled cause as known as 2:13CR00146-001.^
(Id.)
of
Brown further asserts that i t is
any
court"
to
determine
whether
a
"outside the jurisdiction
complaint
is
subject
to
dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim,
(id.) , and that "officers of the court have no immunity."
4.)
Brown
concludes
that
once
this
Court
(Id. at
determines
that
jurisdiction is "lacking in the cause in question," he should be
"assigned the minimum monetary values as pre precedent
.
$25,000.00
hour,
per
23
minute
.
punitive damages .
Also
Rogatory."
his
Complaint
Commercial
Affidavit
(Id.
filed "as
to
at
5.)
According
'lawful public notice'"
Commercial
Code,
and
signatory
signature,
.
that
herein
[of]
a
document
Presented
to
Brown,
styled
As/Under
that
plus
as
an
Letter
document
is
under provisions of the Uniform
"[t]he
is
is
per
.
(Id.)
attached
"International
Brown,
period, i.e. $65,217.91
.
Secured
executing
Party
this
Darrell
Wayne
instrument,
under
expressly to declare his status as a non-resident alien
'with
no
duress, '
in
accord
to
the
terms
of
the
aforementioned private agreement," nunc pro tune to his eighteenth
birthday.
^ In
(Id.)
Case
No.
2:13-CR-146,
Brown was
convicted of
felony
conspiracy in the Norfolk Division of this Court and was sentenced
on March 25, 2014 to 24 0 months of imprisonment.
Judgment at 1-2,
United States v.
Brown,
No.
2:13-CR-146
(Mar.
25,
2014),
ECF No.
38.
The prosecutor in his case was Assistant United States
Attorney ("AUSA") Kevin Comstock whom Brown references throughout
his Complaint.
Brown
Moving
free,
next
Party"
identifies
wherein he
living,
breathing
moral existence,
jure,
also
a
known
a
describes
United
svibject of,
States
regulations .
In a
he
.
."
Act .
.
.
(Id.
or to,
section titled,
Respondent
Office
and a
defaulted
the
New
"by his
its
a
"natural
soil,
an
a
born,
[]
juris
and
et du
inhabitant,
Therefore,
not
says Brown,
a
he
Constitution or the
ordinances,
that
[sic]
private
to
of
statutes,
No:
Issues,"
codes
or
York
.
in
."
the
Secretary
choice,"
states
to
Administrative
2:13CR00146-001
and the Respondent obtained a
.
Brown
remedy
administrative
the
Case
Financing Statement
of
and
at 6.)
"State
his release from custody .
Initial
Party
the Virginia
pursuant
requesting
settled and closed,
as
of
(Id.)
"tendered payment
named
himself
"Identification
and blood human with sentient
Secured
Constitution,
.
titled,
man/woman upon the
United States citizen."
"is not a
section
flesh
real
as
a
(Id.)
Procedures
be
set
off,
court order for
Brown states he filed an
"commercial
of
the
State
and
so Brown concludes
longer a controversy before the court."
Brown also includes in his papers a
registry"
that
that
at
the
Respondent
"there
is
no
(Id. at 6-7.)
"Notice of Void Judgment"
wherein he argues that the courts to which members of the public
currently have access:
have no jurisdiction over living men.
When
the judge and the prosecutor use deceit and
trickery to cause the living man to believe he
is
actually
the
defendant,
those
public
officials
duties,
have
and
breached
breached
office) with the
legal actions.
(Id.
at
8.)
asserts
Then,
that
the
in
burden
"asserter"-in this case,
had time and two
silent."
(2)
public,
a
fiduciary
contract
and
section
of
their
their
are
titled,
proving
(oath
of
subject
to
"Jurisdiction,"
jurisdiction
lies
Brown
with
the
the named Defendant—but although he "has
different chances to respond," he "has gone
(Id.)
In the next section captioned,
"revokes,
"Rescind of Signatures," Brown
rescinds and cancels any and all signatures, and cancels
any and all silent or assumed powers of attorney of any parties,
known
or
unknown
contracts
conferring
trusteeship
Beneficiary to be placed as a trustee to the trust."
Next,
"Notice
Brown provides
of
Fiduciary
for
the
Trusteeship
causing
the
(Id. at 9.)
"Appointment of Trustee"
and a
Duty."
Brown
(Id.
at
10.)
declares himself the "Grantor and Sole Beneficiary of the Darrell
Wayne
Brown,
Cestui
Que
United States registry .
Vie
.
.
Trust, a
."
(Id.)
documented
Next,
vessel
under
in a "Caveat," Brown
observes that the Defendant "has had every opportunity to respond
to the
proof of
claim
instrument (s)
to him/her by Certified Mail"
record,"
the
Defendant
"must
that were
addressed and sent
and declares that
comply
with
the
"[f]or the Court
proof
of
claim
answering each question that has been presented by affidavit form
and sent back to the Court."
(Id.
at 12.)
Brown then provides
"Judicial Notice," and indicates that he "appoints" AUSA Kevin M.
5
Comstock and his successors
"as co-trustees
for any judicial or
administrative matter in which the Darrell Wayne Brown Cestui Que
Vie
Trust may
be
specifically
involved,
for
Case
"specifically appoint[s]
matter,"
"zeroing
the
past,
No.
the Co-Trustee(s)
good faith and candor towards,
Finally,
&
in
Conclusion,"
Defendant
Virginia
the
Brown
"exercis[ing]
section
that
against
titled,
AUSA
inadvertence . . .
(I^
the
justice,
un-rebuttable
Kevin
Secured
through
at
scrupulous
13.)
"Relief
Comstock
Sought
and
Party,
committing
negligence
He
the
the Commonwealth of
states
a
and/or
that
Superior
Claim
over
Case
No.
that
of
the
"[t]his
Commonwealth
of
(Id.) Therefore, he argues, the
2:13CR00146-001
must
be
"vacated
want/lack of subject matter jurisdiction and dismiss
prejudice"
he
the Holder-in-Due-Course and has established an
Virginia concerning the Debtor."
in
that
and for the benefit and on behalf
last
of
Secured Party is
and
and
(Id.)
states
proceed
malfeasance
judgment
while
future,
to settle and close the
"knowingly and willingly allow[ed]
to
and
2:13CR00146-001,"
account,"
of Darrell Wayne Brown."
present,
[sic]
for
with
(id.); he should be discharged from the custody of the
Commonwealth of Virginia; a hearing should be convened to appoint
Kevin Comstock as
"trustee(s)
of Darrell Wayne Brown,"
and "the
Secured Party Darrell Wayne Brown [should] be released/discharged
from
any
and
all
obligations
owed
to
the
Commonwealth
of
Virginia."
the
(Id.)
Complaint,
Statement,
Brown has also appended a number of exhibits to
including
and numerous
a
Uniform
Commercial
other
financial
III.
Code
documents.
Financing
(ECF No.
1-1
ANALYSIS
through ECF No. 1-10.)
The
Complaint
delusional.
However,
It,
in
this
indeed,
is
utterly
frivolous
and
is the epitome of frivolity and delusion.
i t is unnecessary and inappropriate to engage in Brown's
fanciful theories for relief,
1315
case
(4th Cir.
1996)
see Cochran v.
Morris,
73 F.3d 1310,
(emphasizing that "abbreviated treatment"
is
consistent with Congress's vision for the disposition of frivolous
or
"insubstantial
319,
are
324
claims"
(1989))),
(citing Neitzke
because,
on
"inarguable
allegation[s]."
Williams,
legal
it
is
readily apparent
conclusion[s]"
Neitzke, 490
U.S.
at
and
No.
1:16CV1254
Nov.
10,
2016)
appeal dismissed,
No.
17-177,
2017
(AJT/MSN) ,
(dismissing
682 F.
WL
U.S.
325.
as
2016 WL
App'x 188
3325030
Complaint is legally frivolous.
(4th Cir.
(U.S.
Oct.
they are
factual
Accordingly,
Brown's
6663909,
frivolous
that
"fanciful
Complaint will be dismissed as legally frivolous.
Rich,
490
to the extent that Brown's allegations
comprehensible at all,
based
v.
See Champean v.
at
similar
2017),
10,
*3
(E.D.
Va.
allegations),
cert,
2017).
denied.
Brown's
The action will be dismissed.
The
Clerk
is
directed
to
send
a
copy
of
the
Memorandum
Opinion to Brown.
It is
so ORDERED.
/s/
Robert E. Payne
Senior United States District Judge
Richmond, Virginia
Date; December } th, 2017
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?