Phipps v. Holder ( 2012 )

FILED
JUN 2 2 2012
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia
HERBERT D. PHIPPS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v.
)
) Civil Action No. 12 1026
)
ERIC HOLDER, )
U.S. Attorney General, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis
and his pro se complaint. The Court will grant the application and dismiss the complaint.
It appears that the plaintiff is serving a term of imprisonment imposed by the United
States District for the Southern District of Indiana upon his conviction for conspiracy to
distribute methamphetamine. See Compl. at 4. He claims that the statute under which he was
prosecuted and sentenced "was never been passed by Congress," id. at 5, rendering the "Federal
Indictment ... invalid," id. at 8, and causing him "to be ... falsely imprisoned." !d. The
plaintiff brings a claim against the Attorney General under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents
of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971 ), 1 and asks the Court to declare the
statutes invalid and to order his immediate release. Compl. at 43-44.
The Court construes the complaint as a challenge to the legality of the plaintiffs criminal
sentence. He must present such a claim to the sentencing court in a motion under 28 U.S.C. §
2255. Taylor v. US. Bd. ofParole, 194 F.2d 882, 883 (D.C. Cir. 1952) (stating that a motion
Bivens recognized a cause of action for damages against federal officials acting under
color of their authority who violate a claimant's constitutional rights.
\
( /
!~ 1
under Section 2255 is the proper vehicle for challenging the constitutionality of a statute under
which a defendant is convicted). Section 2255 provides specifically that:
[a] prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act
of Congress claiming the right to be released upon the ground that
the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws
of the United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to
impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the
maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral
attack, may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate,
set aside or correct the sentence.
28 U.S.C. § 2255(a) (emphasis added).
Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the complaint. An Order accompanies this
Memorandum Opinion.
United States District Judge