Hakiem Johnson v. TROY LEVI On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District…

DLD-215 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 08-2210
___________
HAKIEM JOHNSON,
Appellant
v.
TROY LEVI
____________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Civil No. 08-cv-01173)
District Judge: Honorable R. Barclay Surrick
____________________________________
Submitted for Possible Summary Action Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P.
10.6
May 30, 2008
Before: BARRY, CHAGARES and ROTH, CIRCUIT JUDGES.
(Opinion filed: July 11, 2008)
_________
OPINION
_________
PER CURIAM
Hakiem Johnson appeals, pro se, from the District Court’s denial of his habeas
corpus petition. We will summarily affirm. See LAR 27.4; I.O.P. 10.6.

-- 1 of 3 --

In August 2007, Johnson previously filed a pro se petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1
2241. He requested the dismissal of the indictment against him and his release from pre-
trial custody on such grounds as prosecutorial misconduct and perjury by police officers
and federal agents with respect to a search warrant’s affidavit of probable cause. The
District Court denied Johnson’s petition as frivolous and this Court affirmed the District
Court’s judgment. See C.A. No. 07-4706.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.2
2
Johnson is a defendant in a complex criminal case currently pending before the
District Court. (See United States v. Coles, et al., E.D. Pa. Crim. No. 05-cr-00440.) He is
represented by court-appointed counsel in his criminal case. It appears that the
indictments charged Johnson and twenty-one co-defendants with numerous offenses
related to an alleged drug conspiracy. The District Court has conducted suppression
hearings in the criminal case, and Johnson’s jury trial is currently scheduled to begin on
June 16, 2008.
On March 10, 2008, Johnson filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus,
purportedly pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Regardless of whether Johnson, a federal1
pre-trial detainee, may properly attack the legality of his pre-trial custody under
§ 1651(a), Johnson’s habeas petition was properly denied. Johnson’s contention that he2
is being held in custody pursuant to an unlawful grant of jurisdictional authority because
the criminal jurisdiction statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3231, was never enacted into positive law
and is unconstitutional, is without merit. Section 3231 was properly enacted and is
binding. The 1948 amendment to that statute, Public Law 80-772, passed both houses of

-- 2 of 3 --

3
Congress and was signed into law by President Truman on June 25, 1948. See United
States v. Risquet, 426 F.Supp.2d 310, 311 (E.D. Pa. 2006).
For the foregoing reasons, Johnson’s appeal fails to present a substantial question,
and we will summarily affirm the District Court’s order. See LAR 27.4; I.O.P. 10.6.
Johnson’s motion requesting that the Court treat his document entitled “Affidavit for
Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Subjiciendum the ‘Great Writ,’ as an original
action, and not a notice of appeal, is denied.

-- 3 of 3 --