Skip to main content

Virginia Cases February 03, 2020: Lentz v. Newton

⤴ Up to Virginia Cases

Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia
Date: Feb. 3, 2020

Case Description

KARL LENTZ, Petitioner,
v.
JEFF NEWTON, Respondent.

Case No. 7:20CV00056

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION

February 3, 2020

OPINION

By: James P. Jones United States District Judge

Karl Lentz , Pro Se Petitioner .

The petitioner, proceeding pro se, has filed a pleading, using a form designed to assist inmates in formulating a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. I find that his petition must be summarily dismissed.

I am unable to decipher from Lentz's petition what claims he is attempting to present to this court or what criminal charge, conviction, or sentence he is attacking, if any. It is also not clear that he is currently in custody or that he is likely to be. On the section of the § 2241 form that asks the petitioner to "[s]tate exactly what you want the court to do," Lentz states:

to have an answer for once and all as to: (1) does [a] WHAT, a creation of man and/or of those of mankind, a PUBLIC creation (ie. STATE, COMMONWEALTH; COUNTY; PARRISH; TOWNSHIP) have the RIGHT to IMPRISON [a] man who:

(1). Is acting ONLY in the Private and,/or;

Page 2

(2). Commits a "victimless crime" [cf. corpus delicti] (a) in the private, and/or; (b) in the Public

(3) DO Governmental Agents have the RIGHT, THE RIGHT, THE RIGHT to claim; totake and carry off with and control property of man who chose NOT wish to be ITScitizen; subject; registered voter, etc...

Pet. 8, ECF No. 1.

Under this statute, I may grant a writ of habeas corpus within the jurisdiction of the Western District of Virginia if the petitioner is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States. Habeas corpus petitions are reserved for attacks on the fact or duration of the petitioner's confinement. See Preiser v . Rodriguez , 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). Because Lentz's petition fails to state any comprehensible claim for relief under § 2241 and it does not appear that his circumstances warrant such relief, I will summarily dismiss the petition.

A separate Final Order will be entered herewith.

DATED: February 3, 2020

/s/ JAMES P. JONES
United States District Judge