United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
VAN MEERVELD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Nathaniel Miller, a state prisoner, filed a pro se
pleading entitled “Motion for Removal of Criminal
Prosecution.” The matter was thereafter referred to the
undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for the issuance
of a Report and Recommendation.
pleading is rambling and difficult to decipher. Nevertheless,
based on the references to dates and court cases he mentions
therein, it appears that he is attempting to remove his state
criminal proceeding, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court
No. 396-824, to this federal court. The online Docket Master
concerning that case, a copy of which is attached to this
Report and Recommendation, reflects the following
information: That state prosecution was initiated by the
filing of a bill of information on April 3, 1998, and Miller
was arraigned on April 20, 1998. On April 12, 1999, he was
convicted under Louisiana law of possession of cocaine and
distribution of marijuana. On May 24, 1999, he was sentenced
as follows: on the cocaine conviction to a term of fifty
years imprisonment without the benefit of probation, parole,
or suspension of sentence; and on the marijuana conviction to
a concurrent term of twenty years imprisonment. On June 15,
1999, he was then adjudicated a multiple offender and
resentenced as such on the cocaine conviction to a term of
fifty years imprisonment without the benefit of probation,
parole, or suspension of sentence.
research reflects that Miller's convictions were
subsequently affirmed by the Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court
of Appeal on March 20, 2002. State v. Miller, 817
So.2d 511 (La.App. 4th Cir. 2002) (Table). The Louisiana
Supreme Court denied his related writ application. State
v. Miller, 843 So.2d 388 (La. 2003).
Miller was then unsuccessful in his efforts to obtain
post-conviction relief in the state courts, he filed a
federal habeas corpus petition seeking relief pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254. That petition was dismissed with
prejudice by United States District Judge Jay C. Zainey on
March 21, 2014. Miller v. LeBlanc, Civ. Action No.
12-2806, 2014 WL 1154271 (E.D. La. Mar. 21, 2014). The United
States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied his related
motion for a certificate of appealability on February 5,
2015. Miller v. LeBlanc, No. 14-30441 (5th Cir. Feb.
then sued the judges of both this court and the Fifth Circuit
who were involved in the denial of his federal habeas corpus
petition, as well as various other individuals and the State
of Louisiana. That lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice.
Miller v. Clement, Civil Action No. 16-5778, 2016 WL
4530620 (E.D. La. Aug. 10, 2016), adopted, 2016 WL
4512034 (E.D. La. Aug. 29, 2016), appeal dismissed,
704 Fed.Appx. 398 (5th Cir. 2017).
also attempted to file another federal habeas corpus petition
with this Court. However, in light of the fact that he had
already had a prior such petition dismissed on the merits,
Judge Zainey construed the petition in part as a motion for
authorization to file a second or successive petition and
transferred it to the United States Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals. Miller v. Louisiana, Civ. Action No.
16-13039 (E.D. La. Nov. 1, 2016). The Fifth Circuit denied
authorization. In re Miller, No. 16-31135 (5th Cir.
Dec. 13, 2016).
then continued his efforts to seek post-conviction relief in
the Louisiana state courts which, according to the
aforementioned Docket Master, apparently resulted in him
ultimately being resentenced on the cocaine conviction to a
term of twenty-two years imprisonment without benefit of
probation, parole, or suspension of sentence on January 18,
interim, Miller had filed the instant “Motion for
Removal of Criminal Prosecution” seeking removal
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1455. In pertinent part, that
(a) Notice of removal. - A defendant or
defendants desiring to remove any criminal prosecution from a
State court shall file in the district court of the United
States for the district and division within which such
prosecution is pending a notice of removal signed pursuant to
Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
containing a short and plain statement of the grounds for
removal, together with a copy of all process, pleadings, and
orders served upon such defendant or defendants in such
(b) Requirements. - (1) A notice of removal
of a criminal prosecution shall be filed not later than 30
days after the arraignment in the State court, or at any time
before trial, whichever is earlier, except that for good
cause shown the United States district court may enter an
order granting the defendant or defendants leave to file the
notice at a later time.
(2) A notice of removal of a criminal
prosecution shall include all grounds for such removal. A
failure to state grounds that exist at the time of the filing
of the notice shall constitute a waiver of such grounds, and
a second notice may be filed only on grounds not existing at
the time of the original notice. For good cause shown, the
United States district court may grant relief from the
limitations of this paragraph.
(3) The filing of a notice of removal of a
criminal prosecution shall not prevent the State court in
which such prosecution is pending from proceeding further,
except that a judgment of conviction shall not be entered