Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Garrett v. People

April 27, 2010

MICHAEL RENE GARRETT, PLAINTIFF,
v.
PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable VICTORIA A. Roberts

ORDER (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS HIS CONVICTION, (2) DENYING HIS MOTION TO COMPEL AN ANSWER, AND (3) CLOSING THIS CASE

Plaintiff Michael Rene Garrett is a state prisoner currently confined at Kinross Correctional Facility in Kincheloe, Michigan. On February 11, 2010, Garrett initiated this action by filing a document entitled "Motion to Dismiss: Lack of Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter." The pro se motion and a similar motion filed on March 24, 2010, appear to challenge Plaintiff's state court conviction for interstate kidnapping. Garrett alleges that the crime occurred in Ohio and, therefore, a Wayne County circuit court judge in Detroit, Michigan lacked jurisdiction to try him. Garrett seeks to be taken into federal custody and to have his state conviction vacated for lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction.

The proper federal remedy for a prisoner's challenge to a state conviction is to file a petition for the writ of habeas corpus, following exhaustion of state remedies. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 499 n.14, 500 (1973). Garrett chose instead to file motions to dismiss his conviction pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(2). Those rules are used to challenge a federal court's jurisdiction in a civil lawsuit. See Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 506 (2006) (explaining that an objection to a federal court's lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) "may be raised by a party, or by a court on its own initiative, at any stage in the litigation, even after trial and the entry of judgment"); Estate of Thomson ex rel. Estate of Rakestraw v. Toyota Motor Corp. Worldwide, 545 F.3d 357, 360 (6th Cir. 2008) (explaining, among other things, that the Sixth Circuit reviews de novo a federal district court's dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2)). Because Plaintiff is challenging a state court's jurisdiction in a criminal matter, his motions to dismiss [Dkt. #1 and #4] are DENIED, and this case is hereby closed. Plaintiff's motion to compel an answer to his motions to dismiss [Dkt. #5] is DENIED as moot.

Victoria A. Roberts United States District Judge

20100427

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.