United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Price, Petitioner pro se.
Carpenito, United States Attorney, Elizabeth A. Pascal, AUSA,
Camden Federal Building & U.S. Courthouse, Attorneys for
Respondent Mark Kirby.
A. Zauzmer, AUSA, Chief of Appeals, Anthony Wzorek, AUSA
United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania, Of Counsel.
B. SIMANDLE U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
Tarik Price, a federal prisoner confined at FCI Fairton, New
Jersey, has filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. [Docket Entry 4].
Petitioner asserts he is actually innocent of his conviction
under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) for aiding and abetting the use
of a firearm during a crime of violence in light of the
Supreme Court's decision in Rosemond v. United
States, 572 U.S. 65 (2014). As relief, Petitioner
requests that his § 924(c) conviction be vacated.
reasons expressed below, this Court will deny the petition.
February 1992, Petitioner and co-conspirators robbed a Brinks
armored car in front of a SEPTA office near 10th and Filbert
Streets in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. [Docket Entry 4-1 at
3]. For his role, Petitioner was convicted of conspiracy to
interfere with interstate commerce by robbery, 18 U.S.C.
§ 1951; interfering with, aiding and abetting the
interference with interstate commerce by robbery, 18 U.S.C.
§ 1951; and the use and carrying, and aiding and
abetting the use and carrying, of a firearm during a crime of
violence, 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1) and (2) after a
jury trial in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania. [Docket Entry 4 at 1;
United States v. Tarik Price, 98-cr-00182 (E.D. Pa.
Jan. 5, 1999)]. He was sentenced to a 77-month term on the
§ 1951 charges with a consecutive 240-month term on the
§ 924(c) charge. [Docket Entry 6 at 7]. The Third
Circuit denied his appeal, and the Supreme Court denied a
writ of certiorari. [Id. at 10].
filed a motion to correct, vacate, or set aside his sentence
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania on September 7, 2001. Price v. United States
of America, No. 01-4606 (E.D. Pa. withdrawn Apr. 3,
2002). He filed another § 2255 motion on July 5, 2002
challenging the validity of his § 924(c) conviction.
[Docket Entry 6 at 10]. The trial court denied the motion,
and the Third Circuit denied a certificate of appealability
on September 12, 2003. [Id.] See also Price v.
United States, No. 03-1291 (3d Cir. Sept. 12, 2003].
filed this habeas corpus petition on July 6,
2015. [Docket Entry 1]. The Court
administratively terminated it as Petitioner had not paid the
filing fee or submitted an in forma pauperis
application. [Docket Entry 2]. The Court reopened the case
after Petitioner paid the filing fee. [Docket Entry 3].
Petitioner submitted an amended petition on November 10,
2015. [Docket Entry 4]. The Court ordered Respondent to
answer. [Docket Entry 5]. Warden Kirby submitted his answer
and two supplemental exhibits. [Docket Entries 6, 7, 8].
Petitioner submitted his traverse. [Docket Entry 9].
matter is ripe for disposition without oral argument.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
brings this petition as a pro se litigant. The Court has an
obligation to liberally construe pro se pleadings and to hold
them to less stringent standards than more formal pleadings
drafted by lawyers. Erickson v. Pardus,551 U.S. 89,
94 (2007); Higgs v. Attorney Gen. of the U.S., 655
F.3d 333, 339 (3d Cir. 2011), as amended (Sept. 19,
2011) (citing Estelle v. Gamble,429 U.S. 97, 106
(1976)). A pro se habeas petition and any supporting
submissions must be construed liberally and with a measure of
tolerance. See Royce v. Hahn,151 F.3d 116, 118 (3d
Cir. 1998); Lewis ...