Message
×
loading..

Jackson v. State of North Guilford County Court ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • `` 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. §§ 1331
     and 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. § 2254
     only 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