The opinion of the court was delivered by: William J. Martini United States District Judge
CAZZIE L. WILLIAMS, Petitioner pro se # 25079-050 FCI Fort Dix P.O. Box 2000 Fort Dix, New Jersey 08640 MARTINI, District Judge
Petitioner, Cazzie L. Williams, a federal inmate presently confined at the FCI Fort Dix in Fort Dix, New Jersey, brings this petition challenging his sentence and conviction on the ground that his conviction was null and void because the District Court had no jurisdiction to render judgment. For the reasons stated below, the Court will dismiss this petition for lack of jurisdiction.
Petitioner filed this habeas petition June 7, 2010. He submitted a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis, and it appears that he qualifies for indigent status. Petitioner appears to contend that his judgment of conviction is invalid, null and void because he did not enter a guilty plea to any specific federal offense. Consequently, he brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Petitioner admits that he entered a plea of guilty to a four count indictment on April 14, 2003, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, before the Honorable Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr. He alleges that his plea was entered to an indictment that charged no crime, and states that the transcript of the plea shows that he did not plead guilty to a specific crime. Petitioner was sentenced on November 17, 2003, to a prison term of 156 months.
Petitioner attaches the indictment, the April 14, 2003 plea transcript, and the judgment of conviction, all of which confirm that he plead guilty to four counts of bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and 2. The plea transcript shows that Petitioner recounted the bank robberies occurring in New Jersey, which form the basis of his judgment of conviction. In short, there is no proof or evidence that Petitioner pled guilty to no charge or crime that would serve to render his judgment of conviction null and void.
Petitioner admits that he filed a direct appeal from his conviction, as well as a motion challenging his conviction and sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, all of which were unsuccessful.
Petitioner brings this action as a petition for habeas corpus relief. "Habeas corpus petitions must meet heightened pleading requirements." McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849, 856 (1994). A petition must "specify all the grounds for relief" and set forth "facts supporting each of the grounds thus specified." See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Rule 2(c) (amended Dec. 1, 2004), applicable to § 2241 petitions through Habeas Rule 1(b).
A court presented with a petition for writ of habeas corpus "shall forthwith award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person detained is not entitled there." 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Thus, "Federal courts are authorized to dismiss summarily any habeas petition that appears legally insufficient on its face." McFarland, 512 U.S. at 856; see also United ...