United States District Court, D. New Jersey
McNulty United States District Judge.
petitioner, Tommie Telfair, is a federal prisoner proceeding
pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28
U.S.C. § 2241. (DE 1.) Petitioner has also filed a
motion for bail pending the resolution of this § 2241
petition, as well as two supplemental pleadings in support of
his Petition. (DE 1-3, 3, 4.) He was sentenced by District
Judge Dennis M. Cavanaugh; in connection with other
post-judgment motions, the criminal case was transferred to
me after Judge Cavanaugh retired. (See Crim. No.
08-757, DE 106 (Feb. 13, 2019))
following reasons, I will dismiss the Petition for lack of
jurisdiction and deny the motion for bail.
BACKGROUND AND PLEADINGS
February 2010, Petitioner was convicted by a jury of
conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to
distribute 1, 000 grams or more of heroin, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a) and 841(b)(1)(A)(I), and of
distribution and possession with intent to distribute 100
grams or more of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 841(a), 841(b)(1)(B), and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
See Judgment of Conviction, United Stales v.
Telfair, Crim. No. 08-0757 (D.N.J. Nov. 23, 2011), DE
95. Petitioner was sentenced to 240 months' imprisonment.
See Id. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit affirmed Petitioner's conviction and sentence.
See United States v. Telfair, 507 Fed.Appx. 167, 179
(3d Cir. 2012). Petitioner's request for a writ of
certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was denied.
See Telfair v. United States, 571 U.S. 866 (2013),
rehearing denied, 511 U.S. 1105(2013).
October 2013, Petitioner filed a motion to vacate, set aside,
or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
See Telfair v. United States, Civ. No. 13-6585
(D.N.J. Oct. 25, 2013), DE 1. The Honorable Susan D.
Wigenton, U.S.D.J., granted Petitioner an evidentiary hearing
on his Miranda claim, but denied the rest.
See Order, Telfair, Civ No. 13-6585 (Feb.
17, 2016), DE 37. Following the evidentiary hearing, Judge
Wigenton denied Petitioner's Miranda claim as
well. See Order, Telfair, Civ No. 13-6585
(Sept. 25, 2017), DE 59. The Third Circuit denied
Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability.
See Order of USCA, Telfair, Civ. No.
13-6585 (June 19, 2018), DE 74. Thereafter, Petitioner filed
an untimely motion for reconsideration of the denial of his
§ 2255, as well as a motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b),
which incorporated a request for leave to file a second
§ 2255 motion. Both of those motions were denied.
See Opinion and Order, Telfair, Civ No.
13-6585 (Nov. 18, 2018), DE 78, 79.
August 2016, while his § 2255 matter was still pending,
Petitioner filed his first petition for a writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging his
conviction and sentence. See Petition, Telfair
v. United States, Civ. No. 16-5085 (D.N.J. Aug. 19,
2013), DE 1. Judge Wigenton dismissed the petition without
prejudice, finding that it was essentially a second motion to
vacate his sentence under § 2255 and that any new claims
Petitioner raised were time- barred. See Opinion,
Telfair, Civ. No. 16-5085 (Sept. 20, 2016), DE 3.
Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, which the
Court denied on December 1, 2016. See Order,
Telfair, Civ. No. 16-5085 (Dec. 1, 2016), DE 7. The
Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of this § 2241
petition. See Telfair v. Attorney Gen. United States, et.
al., Civ. No. 16-4417 (3d Cir. Feb. 28, 2017). The
Supreme Court denied Petitioner's for a writ of
certiorari. See Telfair v. Sessions, Civ. No.
16-8636 (U.S. May 15, 2017).
September 2016, Petitioner filed a second § 2241
petition before then-Chief Judge Jerome B. Simandle, U.S.D.J.
See Telfair v. Lynch, et. al., Civ. No. 16-5372,
2017 WL 3783693, at * 1 (D.N.J. Aug. 30, 2017). Judge
Simandle dismissed the petition, finding that it was
duplicative of Petitioner's first § 2241 petition
before Judge Wigenton. See Id. at *l-2.
2017, Petitioner filed a third § 2241 petition.
See Petition, Telfair v. Ortiz, Civ. No.
17-6065 (D.N.J. Jul. 11, 2017), DE 1. Petitioner argued that
the District Court was not a "true" federal court
and that it therefore lacked personal jurisdiction over him.
See Id. Judge Wigenton found that the petition was
essentially another § 2255 motion. See Order,
Telfair, Civ. No. 17-6065 (Sept. 28, 2017), DE 3.
Construing the petition as a § 2255 motion, Judge
Wigenton determined that Petitioner's newly raised claims
were time-barred. See Id. The petition was dismissed
without prejudice. See id.
in November 2018 and ending in May 2019, Petitioner filed a
series of motions and letter applications pursuant to Fed. R.
Crim. P. 35 and 18 U.S.C. § 3582. Those applications,
filed in his criminal case, sought to challenge or modify his
sentence. I denied these motions. See Opinion and
Order Telfair, Crim. No. 08-0757 (Sept. 4, 2019), DE
April 2019, Petitioner filed a fourth § 2241 petition.
See Petition, Telfair v. United States,
Civ. No. 19-9379 (D.N.J. Apr. 8, 2019), DE 1. Here,
Petitioner again challenged his conviction arguing that,
under the savings clause and pursuant to the Supreme
Court's decision in Rosamond v, United States,
572 U.S. 65 (2014), he was actually innocent of the offenses
for which he had been convicted. See Id. Judge
Simandle dismissed the petition, finding that the Court
lacked jurisdiction over the § 2241 case because the
Petitioner had the opportunity to, but did not, raise this
claim in his § 2255 motion. See Opinion,
Telfair v. United States, Civ. No. 19-9379 (June 21,
2019), DE 3.
October 2019, Petitioner filed this, his fifth § 2241
petition in this action. (DE I.) Petitioner simultaneously
filed a motion for bail. (DE 1-3.) Petitioner has also filed
two supplemental briefs. (DE 3, 4.)