Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. CCB-10-1496.
June 15, 2010
MEMORANDUM
Ryan Sutton ("Sutton"), a Maryland Division of Correction inmate confined at the Jessup Correctional Institution, filed this action on a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights form seeking court intervention to "make the state drop the charges." Paper No. 1 at 4. Sutton's brief statement of claim alleges that on November 26, 2009, defendant Greene perjured himself by reporting that he was given a cell phone by Sutton while in Sutton's cell. He further claims that on December 4, 2009, he was interviewed by Detective Edwards and gave him unspecified evidence that was never reviewed and has now been erased. Id.
Inasmuch as Sutton is attacking a pending criminal proceeding and is seeking to compel the state to drop the criminal charge, his action shall be treated as a hybrid 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas and 28 U.S.C. § 1361 mandamus petition. Because he appears indigent, Sutton's motion to proceed in forma pauperis shall be granted.
A district court will generally not intervene in ongoing state court criminal matters until the state judicial remedies available to a petitioner have been fully exhausted. See Huffman v. Pursue, Ltd., 420 U.S. 592, 609-610 (1975). Moreover, for a federal court to exercise its habeas corpus power to stop state criminal proceedings, "special circumstances" must exist. See Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit, 410 U.S. 484, 489 (1973); Dolack v. Allenbrand, 548 F.2d 891, 893 (10th Cir. 1977). Such extraordinary circumstances include: bad faith prosecution; prosecution under patently unconstitutional statutes; or prosecution before a biased state tribunal. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 53-54 (1971); Moore v. Sims, 442 U.S. 415, 424 (1979).
There is no showing that Sutton has exhausted his state court remedies. Further, to the extent that he has raised viable claims under the United States Constitution, his allegations do not raise substantive grounds for federal court intervention in his pending state prosecution by means of a pre-trial § 2241 habeas petition. See, e.g., Dickerson v. Louisiana, 816 F.2d 220, 226 (5th Cir. 1987). The merits of the habeas petition shall not be considered by this court.
The Maryland state judicial case search website indicates that criminal summons was issued by the Maryland State Police and recently served on Sutton on April 16, 2010 for possession of contraband in a place of confinement. See copy attached. The underlying criminal charge arose from an incident occurring on November 26, 2010. See State v. Sutton, Criminal No. 4A00218621 (District Court for Anne Arundel County). See attached docket.
Moreover, this Court does not have jurisdiction over state employees in an action for writ of mandamus. See Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1361. A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary writ that is only available in cases where no other means by which the relief sought could be granted. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). The mandamus relief sought in the instant case is not the only means by which Sutton may obtain disposition of his charge.
See also AT T Wireless PCS, Inc. v. Winston-Salem Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 172 F.3d 307, 312 n. 3 (4th Cir. 1999).
Accordingly, a separate Order shall be entered dismissing this action without prejudice. Case Information DISTRICT COURT FOR ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY — CRIMINAL SYSTEM 4A00218621 101001162883 CRIMINAL 07 02 SUMMONS 03/30/2010 ACTIVE Defendant Information SUTTON, RYAN BLACK, AFRICAN AMERICAN M 602 250 05/28/1973 JESSUP CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE BROCK BRIDGE RD JESSUP MD 20794-0000 Court Scheduling Information 07/13/2010 08:45 004 7500 GOV RITCHIE HWY GLEN BURNIE 21061-3756 Charge and Disposition Information (Each Charge is listed separately. The disposition is listed below the Charge) 001 POSS CONTBND-PLACE OF CONFINEM CR.9.412.(a)(3) POSS CONTBND-PLACE OF CONFINEMENT 1 1835 X 11/26/2009 11/26/2009 Related Person Information (Each Person related to the case other than the Defendant is shown) EDWARDS, HARRY DET. COMPLAINANT Event History Information Event Date Comment SUMI 03/30/2010 SUM ISSUED 100330 AGENCY: MSP 9065 SUMS 04/16/2010 SUM SERVED 100407 The complete case file must be obtained from the District Court in which the case was last heard.
DISTRICT COURT OF MARYLAND Go Back Court System: Case Number: Tracking No: Case Type: District Type: Location Code: Document Type: Issued Date: Case Status: Defendant Name: Race: Sex: Height: Weight: DOB: Address: City: State: Zip Code: Trial Date: Trial Time: AM Room: Trial Type: Trial Location: Charge No: Description: Statute: Description: Amended Date: CJIS Code: MO/PLL: Probable Cause: Incident Date From: To: Victim Age: Name: Connection: