Russell Robinson vs United States of America
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN RUSSELL ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:20-cv-0034 ) ) ) ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant United States Attorney’s (“the Government”) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, ECF No. 11. For the reasons set forth below, the Government’s motion shall be granted. On April 22, 2020, Plaintiff Russell Robinson (“Robinson”) filed his complaint. ECF No. 1. Though the precise nature of Robinson’s claims is unclear, it appears that Robinson alleges that his conviction was obtained as a result of the Government’s use of fraudulent recordings and an illegal modification to the indictment. ECF No. 1. Robinson seeks a writ of coram nobis to vacate his convictions, in addition to two-billion dollars in damages. See generally ECF Nos. 1, 3. On June 23, 2020, the Government filed its motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 11. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-3_20-cv-00034/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-3_20-cv-00034-0.pdf
SHA-256 3e11cbdd7fdf7933f3e8ad54438d40384bdd5710e85e2cccb9897d2c87f1db46
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-3e11cbdd7fdf
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN RUSSELL ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:20-cv-0034 ) ) ) ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant United States Attorney’s (“the Government”) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, ECF No. 11. For the reasons set forth below, the Government’s motion shall be granted. On April 22, 2020, Plaintiff Russell Robinson (“Robinson”) filed his complaint. ECF No. 1. Though the precise nature of Robinson’s claims is unclear, it appears that Robinson alleges that his conviction was obtained as a result of the Government’s use of fraudulent recordings and an illegal modification to the indictment. ECF No. 1. Robinson seeks a writ of coram nobis to vacate his convictions, in addition to two-billion dollars in damages. See generally ECF Nos. 1, 3. On June 23, 2020, the Government filed its motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 11. Therein, the Government argues that Robinson’s complaint must be dismissed because the Court cannot issue a writ of coram nobis in a civil action, and in any event, Robinson is not entitled to such a writ. ECF No. 11, at 7. On June 30, 2020, Robinson filed his opposition, appearing to argue that the Court can issue such a writ under Fed. R. Crim. P. 57(b). See generally ECF No. 12. The Court is not persuaded by Robinson’s argument. The Federal Rules of Civil procedure “govern the procedure in all civil actions and proceedings in the United States district courts… .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. Rule 60(e) clearly states, “The following are abolished: bills of review, bills in the nature of bills of review, and writs of coram nobis, coram vobis, and audita querela.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(e); see also U.S. v. Morgan, Case: 3:20-cv-00034-RAM-RM Document #: 14 Filed: 09/30/21 Page 1 of 2 Robinson v. United States Attorney Case No. 3:20-cr-0034 Order 346 U.S. 502, 505 n. 4 (1952) (“Such a motion is a step in the criminal case and not, like habeas corpus where relief is sought in a separate case and record, the beginning of a separate civil Proceeding.”). Thus, it is clear to the Court that the relief Robinson seeks is not available in this proceeding. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Government’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 11, is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED. It is further ORDERED that all pending motions are MOOT. And it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case. DATED: September 30, 2021 /s/ Robert A. Molloy_______ ROBERT A. MOLLOY CHIEF JUDGE Case: 3:20-cv-00034-RAM-RM Document #: 14 Filed: 09/30/21 Page 2 of 2