Tompkins v. Warden, FCC Coleman - Low
Tompkins v. Warden, FCC Coleman - Low
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION JONATHAN A. TOMPKINS, Petitioner, v. Case No: 5:19-cv-559-Oc-02PRL WARDEN, FCC COLEMAN - LOW, Respondent.
ORDER. DISMISSING CASE Petitioner, proceeding pro se, initiated this case by filing a Petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 1). Petitioner challenges his “prosecution under
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)” claiming it is “null and void because the Government was not able to both that Tompkins knew he possessed a firearm and that he knew he belonged to the relevant category of persons barred from possessing a firearm.”
Id. at 6-7. Rule 12(h)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[i]f the court determines at any time that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.” See also Rule 12, Rules Governing Section 2255 proceedings. Recently, sitting en banc the Eleventh Circuit overruled prior precedent and held that
28 U.S.C. § 2241is not available to challenge the validity of a sentence except on very narrow grounds not present in this case. McCarthan v. Director of Goodwill
Industries-Suncoast, Inc.,
851 F.3d 1076, 1079(11th Cir. 2017) (en banc) (quoting
28 U.S.C. § 2255(e)); Bernard v. FCC Coleman Warden,
686 F. App’x 730(11th Cir. 2017) (citing McCarthan,
851 F.3d at 1092-93). Thus, pursuant to Rule 4(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts (directing sua sponte dismissal if the petition and records show that the moving party is not entitled to relief), this case is DISMISSED. See also
28 U.S.C. § 2255(b). The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing this case without prejudice, terminate any pending motions, and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, l ony of November 2019.
WILLIAM F. JUNG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to: Pro Se Petitioner
Reference
- Status
- Unknown