Motion to Dismiss the Indictment/Motion to Dismiss the Case — No. 2:23-cr-00215 (Dkt. 142, E.D. Pa.)

Summary

Chihean Jones, writing pro se, asks the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to dismiss the indictment and the case in United States of America v. Chihean Jones, Case No. 23-215. The motion, declared true under penalty of perjury on 4 March 2024, says Jones never received notice of the impaneling of the grand jury and was not brought to court to attend its selection. Jones cites Rule 6(b)(1) and the note to that subdivision and argues that the omission violated due process under the 5th Amendment. The motion contends that the violation destroyed the court's subject-matter jurisdiction, so the indictment and everything after it are void. It also invokes the 8th Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

TRULINCS 75967510 - JONES, CHIHEAN - Unit: PHL-D-N

FROM: 75967510

iO;

SUBJECT: Motion to Dismiss Indictment
DATE: 03/04/2024 07:23:26 PM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CASE NO. 23-215
v. )

Honorable Judge Ange Kelly Brishom Hodge
CHIHEAN JONES )

MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT/MOTION TO DISMISS THE CASE

Now here comes defendant, Chihean Jones, pro se, respectfully requesting this honorable District Court to dismiss the
indictment and dismiss the case.

This motion is being made in good faith for the following reasons:

Defendant petitions to this honorable court in an effort to protect his constitutional rights to due process of law, which is
protected by the 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Defendant also wishes to protect himself against cruel and unusual punishment, which offends the 8th Amendment of the
United States Constitution

Furthermore, it is also defendant's belief that he has the right to challenge the grand jury. see Federal Criminal Procedures Rule

6(b)(1).

it is defendant's belief that he had the right to be present at the selection of the grand jury. See note to subdivision (b)(1) or
Exhibit A.

It is defendant's belief that according to the note to subdivision (b)(1)...it states that "the defendant held for action of the grand
jury shall receive notice of the time and place of the impaneling of a grand jury or, that defendants in custody shall be brought to
court to atend at the selection of the grand jury..."

Defendant contends tht he never received notice nor was he brought to court to attend the selection of the grand jury, therefore,
this is a clear violaion of defendant's right to due process of law, which is protected by the 5th Amendment of the United States
Constitution, thus, this violation of due process of law destroyed the court's subject-matter jurisdiction.

Thus, defendant contends that once the subject-matter jurisdiction was destroyed, anything that occurred thereafter is void,
therefore, the indictment brought is brought outside of the court's subject-matter jurisdiction.

Moreover, defendant respectfully requests this honorable cour o grant this motion. Defendant prays tht this motion is granted, to
dismiss the indictment, and arrest the case.

|, Chihean Jones, declare under the penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct.

Respectfully, ..
CO hansen)
Chihean Jones™

4 March 2024.

7 9 Wd, bZ0Z VW ZT.
O6T Vd VIHdTSQVTIHd |

|

ons a ¥ [Yd
aba Od
Shes

“sande Ge

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.paed.613294.142.0.pdf

Size

700,596 bytes

SHA-256

c0c07fddbbaf72e83c01b0fd14bee98f0a182cb5082cb6d601f081eabce3fff9

Our copy

gov.uscourts.paed.613294.142.0.pdf

Original

archive.org