Opinion
CR 102-003.
November 8, 2007
ORDER
The captioned criminal matter is before the Court on Defendant William Ivery James's pro se "Motion for Relief from Judgment Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)." (Doc. no. 18.)
Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Defendant was convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) 924(a)(2). (See doc. no. 11.) On August 13, 2002, I sentenced Defendant to 120 months of imprisonment, three (3) years of supervised release, and a $100 special assessment. (Doc. no. 13.) Defendant filed the instant motion on October 17, 2007, contending that he is entitled to relief from the Court's judgment in his criminal case pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4) because, inter alia, Title 18 of the United States Code was improperly enacted and therefore the Court lacked subject matter over his criminal case.
Defendant's motion is subject to denial because "`Rule 60(b) simply does not provide relief from judgment in a criminal case.'" United States v. Fair, 326 F.3d 1317, 1318 (11th Cir. 2003) (quoting United States v. Mosavi, 138 F.3d 1365, 1366 (11th Cir. 1998)). Furthermore, Defendant's argument regarding the invalidity of the federal criminal code, which was apparently developed by former federal inmate Tony Davis, is "unbelievably frivolous." United States v. States, No. 06-2345, 2007 WL 2768906 (7th Cir. Sept. 24, 2007). Accordingly, Defendant's motion is DENIED. ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia,
International Legal Services, Mr. Davis's Austin, Texas, based company, has potentially generated a million dollars in fees by advertising that its legal argument "can free just about any federal prison inmate." Chuck Lindell, Ex-convict Appeals to Inmates' Hopes for Freedom: Company Says Cases can be Won on Legal Technicality, Austin American-Statesman, Oct. 28, 2007,available at http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/28/1028tony.html. In light of this incredible assertion, it is not surprising that Mr. Davis himself was sanctioned by the Fifth Circuit for abuse of the judicial system, Davis v. Wendt, No. 04-10682, 2007 WL 2810011 (5th Cir. Sept. 26, 2007), and the Austin Police Department is presently investigating complaints that he has been practicing law without a license.