UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DESMOND GREER, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 1:24-cv-00587 (UNA) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., ) ) Respondents. )

Memorandum Opinion

In February 2024, Monika Gray-El filed a pro se petition for habeas corpus and application

for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on behalf of Desmond Greer. ECF Nos. 1, 2. Greer is a

state prisoner currently incarcerated at the Algoa Correctional Center in Jefferson City, Missouri.

ECF No. 1 at 1. He is serving a 10-year sentence issued by Missouri’s 33rd Judicial Circuit Court.

See State v. Greer, No. 21SO-CR01114-01 (Mo. Cir. Ct. filed 11/24/2021), at Dkt. Entry,

Defendant Sentenced, 8/25/2022. 1 Although Gray-El filed a notice of power of attorney indicating

that Greer designated her as his financial durable power of attorney, there was no indication Gray-

El is an attorney, such that she would be authorized to represent Greer in a legal proceeding. See

ECF Nos. 3, 4. In March 2024, the Court therefore ordered Greer to, within 30 days, personally

submit (1) a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and (2) an IFP application bearing his signature,

or in the alternative, pay the $5 filing fee applicable to non-IFP habeas actions. See ECF No. 4 at

2.

In December 2024, Greer filed an amended habeas petition. ECF No. 5. That petition still

does not bear Greer’s signature, and Greer also has not filed an in forma pauperis application or

1 A court may take judicial notice of the public record in other proceedings. See Covad Commc’ns Co. v. Bell Atl. Corp.,

, 1222 (D.C. Cir. 2005). submitted the $5 filing fee associated with this case. In addition to these defects, Greer appears to

have filed this matter in the wrong court.

The petition seeks release from custody due to alleged false imprisonment in violation of

the U.S. Constitution and various federal statutes and treaties. See ECF No. 1 at 1–12; ECF No. 5

at 1–15. Where a state prisoner alleges he is “in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or

treaties of the United States,” his avenue for relief is

. See

(c)(3).

Section 2241 allows a court to grant writs of habeas corpus for prisoners “in custody” only “within

their respective jurisdictions.” See

(a), (c). Indeed, “a district court may not

entertain a habeas petition involving present physical custody unless the respondent custodian is

within its territorial jurisdiction.” Stokes v. U.S. Parole Comm’n,

(D.C. Cir.

2004); Day v. Trump,

(D.C. Cir. 2017). Accordingly, Greer cannot seek such

relief in this Court; he must file in the district where he is in custody, which appears to be the

United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

Alternatively, insofar as Greer challenges his underlying state conviction or legality of his

sentence, he has also filed in the wrong District. Federal review of state convictions and sentences

is available under

after the exhaustion of available state remedies.

(b)(1). An application under § 2254 “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.”

(d). Greer was convicted and sentenced in

Missouri’s 33rd Judicial Circuit Court, so, assuming he has exhausted his state remedies, such a

claim could be filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The Court accordingly dismisses the amended petition without prejudice to refiling in the

appropriate jurisdiction. Greer’s in forma pauperis application is denied as moot. A separate order

accompanies this memorandum opinion.

Date: March 25, 2025 /s/______________________ AMIR H. ALI United States District Judge