United States District Court, N.D. Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND
JOHN MCBRYDE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 filed by petitioner, Gary Dion Allen El-Bey, a
state prisoner confined in the Correctional Institutions
Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ),
against Lorie Davis, director of TDCJ, respondent. After
having considered the pleadings, state court records, and
relief sought by petitioner, the court has concluded that the
petition should be denied.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
in Tarrant County, Texas, Nos. 1451483D and 1451837D, found
petitioner guilty of one count of possession of a controlled
substance, cocaine, of less than one gram and possession of a
controlled substance, heroin, of one gram or more but less
than four grams and assessed his punishment at 2 years'
and 25 years' imprisonment, respectively. (OlClerk's
R. 76; 02Clerk's R. 76.) Petitioner's convictions
were affirmed on appeal and the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals refused his petition for discretionary review.
(Docket Sheet.) Petitioner did not seek writ of certiorari or
state postconviction habeas relief. (Pet. 2-3;
Resp't's Answer Ex. A.)
raises two grounds for relief:
(1) "the State of Texas lacks lawful jurisdiction to
administrate its law on the land known as Fort Worth Tarrant
County Texas"; and
(2) "the State of Texas lacks lawful jurisdiction over
[his] person being born on land in possession of the
Washita/Witchita people, and being officially recognized by
the court as a Native-American from the Washitaw
(Pet. at 4-5.)
Rule 5 Statement
urges that, although petitioner's claims raised for the
first time in this federal petition are unexhausted, the
petition should be denied on the merits. (Resp't's
first claim is premised upon the 1843 Treaty of Bird's
Fort, also known as Bird's Fort Treaty, which was a peace
treaty signed by Sam Houston on behalf of the Republic of
Texas before Texas was admitted into the Union as a
state. The parties to the treaty were the
Republic of Texas and the "Indigenous Nations of the
Delaware, Chickasaw, Waco, Tawakani, Keechi, Caddo,
Anadahkah, Ionie, Biloxi and Cherokee" Indian tribes.
Id. Nowhere in that treaty are the Washita people or
Wichitaw Nation mentioned by name or referenced in any other
way. Nevertheless, the Treaty is no longer in effect.
Petitioner's first claim is frivolous.
second claim is equally frivolous. He asserts that he has
written documents renouncing his United States citizenship
and that, based on his ancestry as a sovereign Native
American, the State of Texas lacked jurisdiction to prosecute
and imprison him for committing criminal offenses. (Pet.
5-7.) Petitioner was prosecuted for criminal offenses while
in Tarrant County, Texas. The laws of the individual states
apply to all persons within a state's borders. See
United States v. James,328 F.3d 953, 954 (7th Cir.
2003). Therefore, petitioner's non-citizenship did not
deprive the State of Texas of jurisdiction over him.
Petitioner's alleged sovereign-citizen status does not
enable him to violate state laws without consequence. See,
e.g., United States v. Benabe,654 F.3d 753, 767
(7th Cir. 2011), cert. denied,565 U.S. 1226 (2012)
(providing "[r]egardless of an individual's claimed
status of descent, be it as a ''sovereign
citizen,' a secured-party creditor,' or
a¶flesh-and-blood human being,' that
person is not ...