Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Tem Heru v. Robinson

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

August 19, 2019

SAKHU MAA TEM HERU aka SEKOU MUATA IMANI, Petitioner,
v.
NORM ROBINSON, Warden Respondent.

          ORDER

          BENITA Y. PEARSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This case has been transferred from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. See Order (ECF No. 6). Pro Se Petitioner Sakhu Maa Tem Heru aka Sekou Muata Imani filed an Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 5). Petitioner is currently incarcerated in the London Correctional Institution, having been convicted in 2008 on four counts of trafficking in drugs (powder and crack cocaine) in Tuscarawas County, Ohio Common Pleas Court Case No. 2007 CR 04 0145. He was sentenced to an aggregate term of 16 years in prison. In this Petition, he asserts he notified the Tuscarawas County Common Pleas Court that he was legally separating from the name of Sekou Muata Imani and all criminal liability associated with that name, but they have failed to acknowledge his declaration. Petitioner also claims that as a result of a “23 and Me” ancestry test, he discovered he is genetically linked to the Pima Native Americans of Arizona. He contends that under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848, inhabitants of the territory now known as Arizona were permitted to elect United States citizenship or to retain Mexican citizenship and remain in the territory. Petitioner claims that as both a Native American and a foreign national, the Tuscarawas County Common Pleas Court lacked jurisdiction to try him on the drug charges. He seeks immediate release.

         This is Plaintiff's second Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 contesting this same conviction. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds the Petition to be successive and it is transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for permission to proceed.

         I. Background

         Petitioner sold crack cocaine or powder cocaine to a confidential informant on four dates in March and April 2007. The sales took place at Petitioner's residence, which was located within 1, 000 feet of an elementary school. Three of the transactions were recorded on audio or video. He was indicted on April 17, 2007 on two counts of aggravated trafficking in drugs, felonies of the first degree, and two counts of trafficking in drugs, felonies of the third degree. He entered pleas of not guilty, and the matter proceeded to a jury trial on April 17, 2008. The jury found appellant guilty on all four counts. On May 14, 2008, the trial court sentenced Petitioner to two consecutive five-year prison sentences for aggravated trafficking, and two consecutive three-year sentences for trafficking, for a total aggregate prison sentence of 16 years. State v. Imani, No. 2008 AP 06 0043, 2009 WL 3491155, at *1 (Ohio App. 5th Dist. Oct. 27, 2009).

         Petitioner filed a timely direct appeal, and presented the following three assignments of error:

1. The trial court erred in failing to grant Appellant's request for substitute counsel and as a result the appellant was denied effective assistance of counsel.
2. The trial court erred in allowing the laboratory reports from the Bureau of Criminal Investigation into evidence, as well as not providing Appellant with an independent analysis performed by a laboratory analyst appointed by the court.
3. The jury verdict is not supported by the sufficiency of the evidence and is against the manifest weight of the evidence.

         The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court in October 2009. Id.

         Petitioner did not file an appeal of that decision to the Supreme Court of Ohio. Instead, on January 8, 2010, Petitioner filed a motion seeking an extension of time to file a Ohio App. R. 26(B) application to reopen his appeal. He, however, failed to file a delayed Rule 26(B) application during that time, and the court of appeals denied the motion for extension on November 10, 2010.

         Petitioner then filed a motion for resentencing under Ohio Crim. R. 52(B) on February 15, 2012. The trial court denied the motion, finding the claims barred by res judicata. Petitioner filed an untimely notice of appeal, which was dismissed sua sponte on April 27, 2012. Imani v. State, No. 2012 AP 04 0029 (Ohio App. 5th Dist. filed April 19, 2012).

         On October 18, 2012, Petitioner filed a delayed Rule 26(B) application to reopen his appeal, arguing his appellate counsel was ineffective ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.