UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
April 23, 2008
RALPH TAYLOR, PLAINTIFF,
JOHN D. TINDER, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Colleen Kollar-kotelly United States District Judge
In this civil action filed pro se by a prisoner at the Federal Correctional Institution in Ashland, Kentucky, plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment against United States District Judge John D. Tinder of the Southern District of Indiana. Plaintiff wants this Court to declare that Judge Tinder "acted beyond his statutory powers granted to him by Congress . . . violate[d] [plaintiff's] rights to due process of law, and . . . [t]hat the judgment entered July 1, 1998, by [Judge Tinder] . . . is void for violation of due process of law." Compl. at 3.
This Court is not a reviewing court and, therefore, lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to review the decisions of another district judge. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332 (general jurisdictional provisions); Fleming v. United States, 847 F. Supp. 170, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), cert. denied 513 U.S. 1150 (1995). To the extent that plaintiff is challenging his criminal conviction, his recourse lies in a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which must be filed in the sentencing court. See Taylor v. United States Board of Parole, 194 F.2d 882, 883 (D.C. Cir. 1952) (where petitioner attacked the constitutionality of the statute under which he was convicted and sentenced, the proper remedy was by motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255); Ojo v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 106 F.3d 680, 683 (5th Cir. 1997) (the sentencing court is the only court with jurisdiction to hear defendant's complaint regarding errors that occurred before or during sentencing). A separate Order dismissing this case for want of jurisdiction accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.