United States of America v. Richard E. Warren

*After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral
argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See
Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted May 21, 2009*
Decided May 22, 2009
Before
WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge
DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge
No. 08‐2058
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff‐Appellee,
v.
RICHARD E. WARREN,
Defendant‐Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, Eastern Division.
No. 05 CR 921
Elaine E. Bucklo
Judge.
O R D E R
Richard Warren used a classic Ponzi scheme in trying to defraud a hedge fund out of
$25 million. The fund manager jumped at the chance to earn a return of 80 to 100 percent in
a few weeks by investing in what Warren described as a no‐risk program overseen by the
Federal Reserve. The fund got its money back only after federal investigators intervened.
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 08‐2058 Page 2
Eventually a jury found Warren guilty on 11 counts of wire fraud, see 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and
the district court sentenced him to a total of 200 months in prison. Warren, who is pro se,
argues in this direct appeal that the district court lacked both personal and subject‐matter
jurisdiction because he is a “citizen of GOD’s Kingdom and not of Earth.” He made the
same frivolous argument 42 times in papers filed in the district court, to no avail. District
courts have subject‐matter jurisdiction over any indictment charging a federal crime, 18
U.S.C. § 3231; United States v. Roberts, 534 F.3d 560, 568 (7th Cir. 2008); United States v.
Hernandez, 330 F.3d 964, 977‐78 (7th Cir. 2003), as well as personal jurisdiction over any
defendant brought before the court to answer an indictment, United States v. Burke, 425 F.3d
400, 408 (7th Cir. 2005); United States v. Jones, 938 F.2d 1425, 1428 n. 6 (7th Cir. 1993). And
since Warren raises no other challenge to his convictions or sentence, the judgment of the
district court is
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --