United States District Court, D. Maryland
CARL H. WEEKS, JR. In Full Life Supreme El Propria Persona Sui Juris Plaintiff,
P.G. COUNTY POLICE DEPT. AGENT STEINKY In there person AGENT CPL. P. JOHNSON In there person Defendants.
DEBORAH K. CHASANOW United States District Judge.
Weeks ("Weeks") filed this self-represented
complaint and motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on August 26, 2016. ECF Nos. 1 & 2. The
in forma pauperis affidavit was not signed. Further,
Weeks failed to provide summonses and service addresses for
all three defendants. Weeks' claim, in which he sought
$25, 000.00 in damages, consisted of one statement:
have video evidence of my rights being violated to be put
into the record." ECF No. l, p. 6.
September 9, 2016, Weeks was ordered to file a supplemental
complaint, indigency motion, summonses and United States
Marshal forms. ECF No. 4. The documents were returned to the
court as "undeliverable" and the Order was remailed
to Weeks on September 27, 2016. On October 7, 2016, Weeks
filed supplemental materials, including a supplemental
complaint and supplemental indigency application. ECF Nos. 6
& 7. Because he appears indigent, his motions for leave
to proceed in forma pauperis shall be granted.
Weeks' supplemental complaint provides this court with no
direction as to the jurisdictional basis for the filing.
Weeks completes both the federal question and diversity
jurisdiction sections of the complaint, citing to violations
of the Fourth and Ninth Amendments, "Supreme Court
cases, " the "Treaty of Peace and Friendship of
1787" and an "allodial" cost schedule of
damages of $26, 175.00. ECF No. 6, pp. 4-5, & 7.
his statement of claim is comprised of nonsensical statements
containing the following allegations:
For the record, I Supreme-El Moorish American National. Not a
corporate, 14thAmendment chattel person. Not the
all caps CARL HAYWOOD WEEKS, JR. Authorized Presenter of NOM
DEGERE "War Name." I am IN FULL LIFE Blood Man. I
know my estate my constitutional and human rights were
violated on 8-6-16 when Acting Officer #3175 Philip Johnson
CPL of P.G. County Private Police Dept. Dist. 4 stopped me in
my travel. Appx. 5:30 -6:00 p.m. along what's being
called Indian Head Hwy. corporate Oxon Hill, Md. He put his
lights on me, came to my car and demand license. What I told
him I am Supreme-El and I don't use it as it is an
instrument used for trade [unintelligible] or
"traffic." I was traveling. Mr. Phillip Johnson
doing business without a bond opened my car door without my
permission or warrant. Begin to search me illegally and car.
Took or illegally seized my car "private property."
Acting officer doing business without bond Eric Steinky
#3795. During a conversation I informed him of my
nationality. He told me it not real. "That's not a
real thing." In conspiracy to violate me. For the record
with all due respect. I demand relief. Please use my
appellation when, as I am in my proper person, for the record
Supreme El. Please see original exhibits.
ECF No. 6, p. 6-7.
a complaint need not contain detailed allegations, the facts
alleged must be enough to raise a right to relief above the
speculative level and require "more than labels and
conclusions, " as '"courts are not bound to
accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual
allegation.'" Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). The complaint must
contain "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face." Id. at 569. Once a
claim has been stated adequately, it may be supported by
showing any set of facts consistent with the allegations in
the complaint. Id. at 547.
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, courts are required to screen a
plaintiffs complaint when in forma pauperis status
has been granted. Pursuant to this statute, numerous courts
have performed a preliminary screening of non-prisoner
complaints. See Michau v. Charleston Cnty., S.C.,
434 F.3d 725, 727 (4th Cir. 2006) (applying 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B) to preliminary screen a non-prisoner
complaint); Troville v. Venz, 303 F.3d 1256, 1260
(11th Cir. 2002) (applying § 1915(e) to non-prisoner
actions); Evans v. Albaugh, 2013 WL 5375781 (N. D.
W.Va. 2013) (28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) authorizes dismissal of
complaints filed in forma pauperis)
court has thoroughly examined the complaint and supplemental
complaint, and finds they are insufficient and do not comply
with federal pleading requirements. Although afforded a
further opportunity to file a cogent and understandable
complaint, Weeks has presented a statement of claim
consisting of a rambling discourse regarding an apparent
August 2016 police stop of Weeks' vehicle in Prince
George's County, Maryland. The language used in Weeks'
complaint is consistent with the "flesh and blood"
defense frequently raised in this court in criminal
prosecutions and soundly rejected. Weeks' jurisdictional
claims, even if couched in "flesh and blood"
language, do not raise claims involving violation of the
Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States as
these reasons, the complaint shall be dismissed by separate