IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION

SHERREL JEAN COURVELLE PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 6:24-cv-06088

MIKE MCCORMICK, Sheriff of Garland County, Arkansas DEFENDANT ORDER Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed October 31, 2024, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 19). Judge Bryant recommends that Plaintiff Sherrel Jean Courvelle’s (“Plaintiff”) Habeas Corpus Petition pursuant to

be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust available state remedies. Plaintiff has filed objections to Judge Bryant’s R&R, subscribing to what is commonly known as “sovereign citizen” ideology—despite her protests otherwise.1 (ECF No. 24). In support of her perceived status and immunity from the laws of this country, she has filed thirteen (13) pages of objections and thirty-three (33) pages of supporting documents. (ECF No. 24; ECF No. 24-1; ECF No. 24-2). These documents are largely incomprehensible and present no specific objections to Judge Bryant’s R&R. Further, the Eighth Circuit has long held that claims and arguments based on sovereign citizen ideology are inherently frivolous and are a waste of

1Plaintiff states “Comes Now, Sherrel Jean Courvelle, the living woman, an Arkansas State Citizen, standing on Land and Soil Jurisdiction. I am NOT a U.S. Citizen, I am NOT a citizen of the United States, I am Not a CORPORATE FRANCHISE.” (ECF No. 24, at 2). Further, she believes the United States government is a corporation. (ECF No. 24, at 9). These are commonly used sovereign citizen terms and beliefs. See generally Federal Bureau of Investigation Domestic Terrorism Unit, Sovereign Citizens: An Introduction for Law Enforcement, available at https://info.publicintelligence.net/FBI-SovereignCitizens.pdf (last accessed Nov. 21, 2024). judicial resources. See United States v. Jagim,

(8th Cir. 1992) (Ruling that sovereign citizen claims in the case were without merits, patently frivolous, and should be rejected without wasting anymore of the Court’s resources on their discussion); see also Engel v. Corizon, No. 4:20-CV-1744-HEA,

, at *3 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 23, 2021)

(“Arguments based upon sovereign citizen ideology have been summarily rejected as frivolous and irrational in this Circuit and in other federal courts around the nation”). Upon review, finding no clear error on the face of the record and that Judge Bryant’s reasoning is sound, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 19) in toto. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Habeas Corpus Petition pursuant to

is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust available state remedies. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 10th day of January, 2025. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge