Case ID: f-appx_549/html/0596-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ST. LOUIS COUNTY, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Albert D. THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-2164.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Dec. 26, 2013.
    Filed: Jan. 3, 2014.
    Albert D. Thomas, Bridgeton, MO, pro se.
    Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Albert Thomas sought to remove to federal court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1), a state criminal case he alleged was pending against him in St. Louis County Municipal Court, Missouri. The district court summarily remanded the case, and Thomas appealed.

We have authority to review the district court’s remand order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d). We hold that the district court properly remanded the case because the notice of removal did not comply with the procedural requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1455, and did not meet the requirements for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1). See 28 U.S.C. § 1455(a), (b)(1), (b)(4); Johnson v. Mississippi, 421 U.S. 213, 219-20, 95 S.Ct. 1591, 44 L.Ed.2d 121 (1975) (outlining two-prong test for removal under § 1443(1)).

Accordingly, we affirm. 
      
      
        . The Honorable Charles A. Shaw, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.