Order Denying Pro Se Motion to Dismiss Indictment — United States v. Fayne (Jay) (N.D. Ga.)

Record facts

Full text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V.
DANIEL ERIC JAY,
Defendant.
CRIMINAL ACTION FILE
NO. 1:20-CR-228-MHC-JKL-2
ORDER
Defendant Daniel Eric Jay ("Jay") has been charged with one count of
conspiracy to commit wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, two counts of
wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and one count of bank fraud in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344. Second Superseding Criminal Indictment [Doc.
96]. When Jay first appeared in this Court after his arrest in the Western District of
Pennsylvania, he was appointed counsel for his initial appearance [Doc. 5]
followed by the appointment ofKamal Ghali of the law firm Bondurant, Mixson &
Elmore on July 30, 2020, to represent him during his criminal proceedings [Doc.
49]. On October 19, 2020, Megan Cambre of the same law firm entered an
appearance as counsel for Jay [Doc. 91].
On January 4, 2021, Mr. Ghali and Ms. Cambre filed a motion to withdraw
as counsel for Jay based upon pro se filings made by Jay which may have indicated

a desire to represent himself [Doc. 131]. Following that filing, Magistrate Judge
Larkins conducted a Faretta hearing, granted Mr. Ghali's and Ms. Cambre's
motion to withdraw, and indicated he would appoint standby counsel for Jay [Doc.
162]. L Burton Finlayson was appointed to represent Jay as standby counsel on
February 18,2021 [Doc. 165]. On June 21, 2021, a pretrial conference was held
before Judge Larkins, at which Jay indicated that he no longer wished to represent
himself and consented to having Mr. Finlayson represent him in this case, resulting
in the appointment of Mr. Finlayson as Jay's counsel [Doc. 201].
This case was certified ready for trial on September 8, 2021 [Doc. 214].
Based on Jay's request, the Court scheduled the matter for a plea hearing but, on
December 14, 2021, Jay indicated he did not want to go forward with a plea [Doc.
260]. A trial in this case was scheduled for July 19, 2022 [Doc. 264].
On July 1, 2022, a petition for action on conditions of supervised release was
filed, alleging that Jay had violated the conditions of his release [Doc. 277]. Judge
Larkins issued a warrant for Jay's arrest on June 29, 2022 [Doc. 277]. The United
States Probation Office informed this Court that authorities both here and in the
Western District of Pennsylvania, where Jay's release was being supervised, had
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975).
2

no knowledge of Jay's where abouts. On July 19, 2022, this Court and counsel for
the parties appeared to try this case, but Jay did not appear [Doc. 288]. This Court
then entered a bench warrant for Jay's arrest.
On the same day as the scheduled trial. Jay filed by mail "notices" which
included the types of documents and language filed frequently by self-proclaimed
"sovereign citizens"2 [Docs. 286, 287], which was followed on July 21, 2022, with
a pro se Motion to Dismiss the Indictment [Doc. 289]. At this time. Jay is still a
fugitive.
As Jay is currently represented by counsel, this court has the discretion to
reject his pro se filings. United States v. Cross, 962 F.3d 892, 899 (7th Cir. 2020);
United States v. Flowers, 428 F. App'x 526, 530 C6th Cin 2011); United States v.
Pearl, 324 F.3d 1210, 1216 (10th Cir. 2003). Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED
that Jay's pro se Motion to Dismiss Indictment [Doc. 289] is DENIED. The Court
Courts routinely, summarily, and firmly reject sovereign citizen legal theories as
"frivolous." United States v. Sterling, 738 F.3d 228, 233 (llth Cir. 2013)
(citing United States v. Benabe, 654 F.3d 753, 761 (7th Cir. 2011)
("[Sovereign citizen] theories should be rejected summarily, however they are
presented.")); see also United States v. Davis, l:13-cr-0058, 2015 WL 12551076 at
*1 (N.D. Ga. July 1, 2015) ("[L]egal theories of'sovereign citizens' are not
established law in this court or anywhere in this country's valid legal system.").

will consider any filings made by Jay pro se if he appears personally and provides
reasons why this Court should consider such filings despite his current
representation. However, as long as Jay is a fugitive and remains represented by
counsel, the Court will continue to deny any and all pro se motions made by Jay in
this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of July, 2022.
MARK H. COHEN
United States District Judge

File and source

File

028_ECF_290_gov.uscourts.gand.279664.290.0.pdf

Size

769,594 bytes

SHA-256

a290cd35c8fc43360421e395df996d59de5f0b5420c86922cabe5225e5ff980c

Our copy

028_ECF_290_gov.uscourts.gand.279664.290.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)