Court Opinion

ID: 9379172
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-14 21:00:46.840544+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:51.022702
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DAVID BRIAN MORGAN,                                  )
                                                     )
                              Petitioner,            )
                                                     )
       v.                                            )       Civil Action No. 23-543 (UNA)
                                                     )
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                            )
                                                     )
                              Respondent.            )

                                  MEMORANDUM OPINION

       This matter is before the Court on consideration of David Brian Morgan’s application to

proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) and pro se Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate,

Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (ECF No. 1, “Pet.”). Having

been convicted in the Oklahoma County District Court, Morgan is serving a life sentence at the

Joseph Harp Correctional Center in Lexington, Oklahoma. See Pet. at 1 (page numbers

designated by CM/ECF). Generally, Morgan challenges his conviction and sentence, see id. at 5-

6, and among other relief, demands his release from custody, see id. at 14. The Court will grant

the application and dismiss the petition.

       Because Morgan is not in “[a] prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established

by Act of Congress,” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(a), relief under § 2255 is not available. See Morgan v.

State of Oklahoma, No. 16-cv-1003-R, 2016 WL 6269616, at *1 (W.D. Okla. Oct. 26, 2016)

(“Having failed to establish that he is “[a] prisoner under sentence of a court established by Act

of Congress” Mr. Morgan cannot prevail.”). And as Morgan well knows, he has no recourse in

federal district court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 either. See Morgan v. Bear, No. 17-cv-797-R, 2018

WL 2210449, at *1 (W.D. Okla. Apr. 13, 2018) (recounting Morgan’s litigation history and

                                                 1
stating that § 2254 claims in No. 15-cv-782-R had been dismissed “as unauthorized and second

or successive”), report and recommendation adopted, No. 17-cv-797-R, 2018 WL 2209526

(W.D. Okla. May 14, 2018); see also Morgan v. United States, No. 22-1060 (D.D.C. May 6,

2022) (dismissing § 2254 petition for lack of jurisdiction).

       An Order is issued separately

                                                               /s/
                                                               RANDOLPH D. MOSS
DATE: March 13, 2023                                           United States District Judge

                                                 2