United States of America v. Anthony Phillips

08-2853United States Court Of Appeals For The 7th CircuitMay 28, 2009

Full text

*After examining the briefs and the records, we have concluded that oral argument is
unnecessary. Thus, the appeals are submitted on the briefs and the record. See FED. R. A PP.
P. 34(a)(2).
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted May 21, 2009 *
Decided May 28, 2009
Before
WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge
DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge
No. 08‐2853
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff‐Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY PHILLIPS,
Defendant‐Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division.
No. 05 CR 1004
James B. Zagel,
Judge.
O R D E R
Anthony Phillips suggests several unpersuasive reasons why we should vacate his
conviction for mail fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, and money laundering, 18 U.S.C. § 1957. He
insists, for instance, that district courts lack subject‐matter jurisdiction over all crimes not
committed on federal property. But district courts in fact have exclusive subject‐matter
jurisdiction over “all offenses against the laws of the United States.” 18 U.S.C. § 3231;
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 08‐2853 Page 2
United States v. Turcotte, 405 F.3d 515, 521 (7th Cir. 2005). Phillips also contends that the
district court lacked personal jurisdiction over him because he is “a natural man, a
Sovereign state born citizen, a private human being.” This argument is frivolous: a district
court has personal jurisdiction over any defendant brought before it on a federal indictment
charging a violation of federal law. See, e.g., United States v. Marks, 530 F.3d 799, 810 (9th
Cir. 2008); United States v. Rendon, 354 F.3d 1320, 1326 (11th Cir. 2003); see also United States
v. Burke, 425 F.3d 400, 408 (7th Cir. 2005) (explaining that defendant’s presence in the
territory of the United States supplies personal jurisdiction). His remaining claims are too
frivolous to warrant further discussion.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.