Opinion
1:12-cr-148-01 SEB-DKL
01-08-2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. BYRON L. BELLAR, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR
LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
(Docket No. 20)
Defendant, who is representing himself in this matter, has filed a motion asserting that: (1) the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to entertain this cause against him; (2) the statute making the conduct with which he is charged unlawful, 18 U.S.C. § 514(a)(2), was not properly enacted and, therefore, any charges against him brought pursuant to that statute are void; and (3) the arrest warrant naming "Byron L. Bellar" incorporates a "corporate fiction" and does not name "Bryon L. Bellar," who is a "flesh and blood living soul," thereby rendering his arrest invalid. Defendant, thus, asks the Court to dismiss this case against him
The Court has reviewed Defendant's motion and the numerous exhibits submitted therewith as well as the Government's response and, having reviewed the parties' submissions, finds that the law is with the Government. As the Government succinctly notes in its response brief, this Court very clearly has jurisdiction to consider and decide violations of the federal criminal law, and there is no question that 18 U.S.C. § 514(a)(2) is a properly enacted federal criminal law. See 18 U.S.C. § 3231 ("The district courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction . . . of all offenses against the laws of the United States."); U.S. v. Hernandez, 330 F.3d 964, 977 -78 (7th Cir. 2003) ("district judges always have subject-matter jurisdiction based on any indictment purporting to charge a violation of federal criminal law . . . ."); and U.S. v. Delatorre 2008 WL 312647 at 1 (January 30, 2008) (N.D. Ill.) (observing that the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has repeatedly held that there is no merit to the argument that the federal criminal code at Title 18 of the United States Code is unconstitutional because of supposed irregularities in its enactment.). Moreover, there is no legal or factual substance to Defendant's argument that the name Bryan L. Bellar is a "corporate fiction" and the Government lacks authority to proceed against him based on the arrest of his "flesh and blood living soul." See Delatorre, 2008 WL 312647 (rejecting the notion that the defendant named in the indictment was a fictional creation and not a natural person subject to the laws of the United States).
Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter jurisdiction is DENIED.
_______________
SARAH EVANS BARKER, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
Copies to: Gwendolyn M. Beitz
INDIANA FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEFENDERS
gwendolyn_beitz@fd.org
Sharon M. Jackson
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
sharon.jackson@usdoj.gov
BYRON BELLAR
3836 Norris Road
Richmond, IN 47374