All Courts |
Federal Courts |
US Federal District Court Cases |
District Court, District of Columbia |
2012-01 |
-
`` FILED JAN 2 5 2012 C|erk, U.S. District & B k UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT c°"s f°'?h€ Dl``strict oiurigrliiiliijia FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Necus A. Jackson, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) . v. ) Civil Action No. ) ) State of North Guilford ) County Court, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPlNION This matter is before the Court on its initial review of the plaintiffs pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperz's. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(h)(3) (requiring dismissal of an action "at any time" the Court determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction). The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth generally at
28 U.S.C. §§ 1331and 1332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available only when a "federal question" is presented or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. A party seeking relief in the district court must at least plead facts that bring the suit within the court's jurisdiction See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff is a resident of Burlington, North Carolina, suing a county court. She states that she is "trying to understand [the presiding judge’s] . . . judgment . . in her criminal case, Compl. at l, and seeks to vacate her plea of guilty. Ia’. at 5. As a general rule applicable here, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the decisions of other courts. See Flemz``ng v. Um'led Stales, 847 F. Supp. l70, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), cert denied
513 U.S. 1150(1995).' A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. Uni 'St%e'{i)i trict Judge FJ//»%? Date: January 743 , 2012 l Federal court review of state convictions is available under
28 U.S.C. § 2254only after the exhaustion of available state remedies. See
28 U.S.C. §2254(b)(l). Thereafter, "an application for a writ of habeas corpus [] made by a person in custody under the judgment and sentence of a State court . . . may be filed in the district court for the district wherein such person is in custody or in the district court for the district within which the State court was held which convicted and sentenced [petitioner] and each of such district courts shall have concurrent jurisdiction to entertain the application." 28 U.S.C. § 224l(d). Plaintiff`` s recourse lies, if at all, in an appropriate federal district court in North Carolina. 2
Document Info
Docket Number: Civil Action No. 2012-0121
Judges: Judge James E. Boasberg
Filed Date: 1/25/2012
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/30/2014