United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
SUZANNE MITCHELL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Jones (Petitioner), a state prisoner appearing pro se, seeks
habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Doc.
Chief United States District Judge Joe Heaton has referred
the matter to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for initial
proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B),
(C). Doc. 4. Because "it plainly appears from the
petition . . . that [P]etitioner is not entitled to relief in
the district court, " the undersigned recommends its
summary dismissal without prejudice to refiling. Rule 4,
Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts (Section 2254 Rules).
raises four "ground[s] (reason[s]) t[o] support[ his]
claim that [he is] being held in violation of the
Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."
Doc. 1, at 7.
first alleges that his "[d]etention is in violation of
Constitution, and Okla state courts lack jurisdiction over
American Indians who commit crimes in Indian country, upon
an-Indian, on Indian land, inside an Indian reservation, and
detention is violative of well-established federal law,
constitution, and treaties." Id. As factual
support, Petitioner states,
In 1866, the U.S. Congress passed acts and signed treaties
that all crimes inside an Indian reservation, in
"Indian-country", Indian tribal reservations inside
the "Indian-nations" geographical boundrys of
todays State of Okla, except the pan handle, could only be
tried in a federal court, depriving all Okla state courts of
jurisdiction, making detention violate
"well-established" federal law, constitution and
Petitioner maintains "all Okla residants of this state,
have a federal due process of law right to be informed of
their federal right to be prosecuted only by a grand-jury
indictment, and given an opportunity to waive it, before a
state court can gain jurisdiction to proceed by an
[illegible] motion." Id. For his
"[s]upporting facts, " he states, Longstanding,
clear and well established federal laws, treaties and
constitution, is violated, making detention unconstitutional,
entitling Petitioner to immediate habeas relief. Equal
protection of law mandates any right a person has in one
states, they have in all states. 38 states prohibit
prosecution without a grand jury indictment, as Okla did from
1907, to 1968-by-treaties, constitution and laws.
Petitioner's claim is that "no Okla state court will
hear a habeas-corpus on these issues; have denied access to
courts, due process and suspended habeas-corpus to state
prisoners, making detention violative of clear constitution
and federal laws, requiring habeas relief." Id.
In support, Petitioner maintains that "when state
detains a person in violation of clearly established federal
law, constitution and treaties, and state court's bar
access for habeas corpus, federal habeas is proper."
Id. at 8.