Neal v. Streeval et al
Filing
12
OPINION. Signed by Senior Judge James P. Jones on 11/17/2021. (Opinion mailed to Pro Se Party via US Mail)(slt)
Case 7:21-cv-00380-JPJ-PMS Document 12 Filed 11/17/21 Page 1 of 2 Pageid#: 317
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
DENARD DARNELL NEAL,
Petitioner,
v.
J. C. STREEVAL, ET AL.,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 7:21CV00380
OPINION
JUDGE JAMES P. JONES
Denard Darnell Neal, Pro Se Petitioner.
The petitioner, Denard Darnell Neal, proceeding pro se, has filed a pleading
purporting to invoke habeas corpus jurisdiction. The court liberally construed and
docketed his filing as a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241. Generously construed, Neal alleges in this Petition that under various
purported provisions of civil and commercial law, he should be released from
confinement under his federal criminal sentence. After reviewing his submissions,
I find that Neal’s petition must be summarily dismissed.
Neal is currently confined at the United States Penitentiary Lee (“USP Lee”),
located in this judicial district. His Petition consists of 48 pages and dozens of
attached exhibits.
While his submissions use English words, sentences, and
punctuation, and cite supposed legal documents and provisions of law, I cannot find
any logical, factual, or legal bases on which I have authority to order Neal’s release
Case 7:21-cv-00380-JPJ-PMS Document 12 Filed 11/17/21 Page 2 of 2 Pageid#: 318
from confinement in federal prison, an objective that he seeks to achieve. As a prior
court has held in dismissing a previous submission from Neal, “the questions raised
. . . are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.” United States v. Neal,
263 F. App’x 572 (9th Cir. 2008) (unpublished).
Therefore, without further
discussion, I will summarily dismiss Neal’s Petition without prejudice, because it
fails to demonstrate any ground for habeas relief.*
A separate Final Order will be entered herewith.
DATED: November 17, 2021
/s/ JAMES P. JONES
Senior United States District Judge
*
Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts, which may be applied to § 2241 cases under Rule 1(b), “[i]f it plainly
appears from the [face of a § 2241] petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is
not entitled to relief in the district court, the judge must dismiss the petition and direct the
clerk to notify petitioner.”
-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?