On Wednesday, March 15, 2023, the Judicial Council for the Fifth Circuit dismissed a complaint under case no. 05-23-90001 filed against an unnamed United States District Judge.

The complainant, a former federal prisoner, alleged that the 2018 docket assignment of the underlying 2013 criminal matter went unnoticed by the court. The judge, according to him, “did not order a hearing on the allegations,” “summarily refused to issue a writ of habeas corpus,” and “intentionally ignored the trial judge’s errors” when dismissing the § 2255 motion for untimeliness because he “[did] not want to cease to desist using the Court to harass [ sic ] me,” the plaintiff continues. Everyone is aware of the racism displayed by residents of [State X], BUT HE IS PESTER [sic] ME.”

The complainant appears to also claim that the judge changed the terms of his supervised release without a hearing in an order transferring the case to another jurisdiction where the complainant is serving his term of probation. For example, the judge changed the non-reporting supervised release to “three years supervision by probation officer.”

The filing states:

“He contends that this (purported) alteration of his supervised release constituted an abuse of judicial authority, and “[u]nlawful intimidation and retaliation by contacting [Probation Officer] to carry on underhand and improper negotiations (as by bribery), with the goal of influencing [me] with threats of intimidation, to suffer physical harm, with corrupt persuasion.”

In dismissing the complaint, the Court stated that allegations which relate directly to the merits of decisions or procedural rulings are subject to dismissal. In other ways, the allegations of harassment, racism, intimidation, retaliation, and bribery seem entirely derivative of the charges related to the merits; however, to the extent the allegations are distinct, they are completely without merit and are therefore subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. 352(b)(1)(A)(iii) as “lacking sufficient evidence to raise an inference that misconduct has occurred.”

The court warned the complainant because this was his third merits-related complaint. The court reminded the complainant that if he should file a further merits-related, conclusory, frivolous, or repetitive complaint, his right to file complaints may be suspended and, unless he is able to show cause why he should not be barred from filing future complaints, the suspension will continue indefinitely.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.