Devitoe Farmer indicted for stealing HUD homes

[Lambkin]

http://www.wmctv.com/story/14233885/the ... ds[quote]A federal grand jury indicted a self-described "sovereign citizen" on charges he fudged property deeds to steal homes.

44-year-old Devitoe Farmer of Memphis faces three counts of theft of government property. U.S. Attorney Edward L. Stanton, III, said Farmer knowingly used fraudulent "quit-claim" deeds to essentially steal foreclosed properties assumed by the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD).

"The defendant's scheme involved the theft of valuable real property from the United States government," said Stanton in a press release. "These charges make clear that we will seek to hold accountable those that would perpetrate such fraud on the United States."

If convicted, Farmer could be sentenced up to ten years in prison and fined $250,000. Walter Gunn, Stanton's spokesperson, said a judge released Farmer on a $5,000 bond despite Stanton's request for detention.[/quote]

[LaVidaRoja]

Released on $5,000 bond? What's the incentive for him to ever show up in court?

[wserra]

It's a $5K personal recognizance bond, only secured by $200 in cash. And the moron signed the bond "without prejudice".

If I were the M-J, I wouldn't have approved it. You want to play games, you play them in custody.

[Judge Roy Bean]

And this ain't his first rodeo:

http://www.bustedmugshots.com/tennessee ... er/6294262

Information
Name Devitoe Farmer
Location Memphis, Tennessee
Age 44 years
Booking Date 05-13-2011

Charges
DRIVING WHILE LICENSE S/R/C
VIOL OF VEHICLE REGISTRATION LAW M
VIOLATION OF FINANCIAL LAW

He's also used the name: Devitoe-Chauntaunt: Farmer and tried to get his criminal case removed:

November 18, 2011

CRIMINAL COURT OF MEMPHIS AND SHELBY COUNTY,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
DEVITOE-CHAUNTAUNT:FARMER A/K/A DEVITOE FARMER, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: S. Thomas Anderson United States District Judge

ORDER CORRECTING THE DOCKET ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO RESPOND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AND ORDER REMANDING CASE TO SHELBY COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT

On July 1, 2011, Defendant Devitore-Chauntaunt:Farmer a/k/a Devitoe Farmer filed a Notice of Removal pertaining to a criminal case pending against him in the Criminal Court for Memphis and Shelby County, Tennessee (the "Shelby County Criminal Court") for theft of property over $60,000, accompanied by a motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1 & 2.)*fn1 On July 6, 2011, the Court granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 3.) On July 11, 2011, Defendant filed an amended Notice of Removal. (ECF No. 4.)

On August 16, 2011, the Clerk of the Shelby County Criminal Court filed a motion seeking leave to respond to the Notice of Removal (ECF No. 6) and a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 5). For good cause shown, the motion for leave to respond is GRANTED.*fn2 The Motion to Dismiss assumes, incorrectly, that this is a civil rights action that is subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The Notice of Removal purports to remove Farmer's pending criminal case to federal court. The remedy for an improper removal is an order of remand, not a dismissal of the action.*fn3 Therefore, the motion to dismiss is DENIED.

As noted, Defendant has been charged with theft of property over $60,000. According to the affidavit of complaint, Farmer was occupying a foreclosed residence in Memphis without the consent of the owner, the Federal National Mortgage Association ("FNMA"). When the police arrived to remove him, Defendant claimed to be the owner of the property. Documents were also posted on the door indicating that the property was owned by Devitoe Farmer. (Aff. of Compl., ECF No. 1 at 8.)

The Notice of Removal (Diversity), which is largely incomprehensible, asserts that the State Department had to be notified of the criminal charge, that a federal district court must grant the State of Tennessee jurisdiction to prosecute Farmer, that Farmer is a "NON-Corporate" and in diversity with the State of Tennessee, that Farmer is a corporation with complete immunity from suit, that there has been an unspecified violation of the Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC"), and that the United States Constitution encompasses the UCC. The Notice of Removal purports to seek money damages.

The Modified Notice of Removal purports to add, as additional parties, the Shelby County Sheriff's Department, Officer B. Less, FNMA (which was sued as "Fannie Mae"), the First National Mortgage Association, and Michael Williams, the Chief Executive Office of FNMA. (ECF No. 4.)

There is no subject-matter jurisdiction over the action. "Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that power authorized by Constitution and statute, which is not to be expanded by judicial decree. It is to be presumed that a cause lies outside this limited jurisdiction, and the burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction." Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 114 S. Ct. 1673, 128 L. Ed 2d 391 (1994) (citations omitted); see also Bender v. Williamsport Area Sch. Dist., 475 U.S. 534, 541, 106 S. Ct. 1326, 1331, 89 L. Ed. 2d 501 (1986) ("Federal courts are not courts of general jurisdiction; they have only the power that is authorized by Article III of the Constitution and the statutes enacted by Congress pursuant thereto."); Insurance Corp. of Ireland, Ltd. v. Compagnie des Bauxite de Guinee, 456 U.S. 694, 701, 102 S. Ct. 2099, 2104, 72 L. Ed. 2d 492 (1982) ("Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. The character of the controversies over which federal judicial authority may extend are delineated in Art. III, § 2, cl. 1. Jurisdiction of the lower federal courts is further limited to those subjects encompassed within a statutory grant of jurisdiction."); Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365, 374, 98 S. Ct. 2396, 2403, 57 L. Ed. 2d 274 (1978) ("It is a fundamental precept that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction."). Federal courts are obliged to act sua sponte whenever a question about jurisdiction arises. See, e.g., Insurance Corp. of Ireland, Ltd., 456 U.S. at 702, 102 S. Ct. at 2104 ("a court, including an appellate court, will raise lack of subject-matter jurisdiction on its own motion"); St. Paul Mercury Indem. Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U.S. 283, 287 n.10, 58 S. Ct. 586, 589 n.10, 82 L. Ed. 845 (1938); Answers in Genesis, Inc. v. Creation Ministries Int'l, Ltd., 556 F.3d 459, 465 (6th Cir. 2009) ("federal courts have a duty to consider their subject matter jurisdiction in regard to every case and may raise the issue sua sponte"). A district court may address the issue of subject-matter jurisdiction of a removed case sua sponte. Probus v. Charter Communic'ns, LLC, 234 F. App'x 404, 406 (6th Cir. 2007). Although a district court may not remand a case sua sponte because of a procedural defect in the removal, Page v. City of Southfield, 45 F.3d 128, 132-33 (6th Cir. 1995), a sua sponte remand for want of subject-matter jurisdiction is permitted, Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty. Gov't Civil Serv. Comm'n v. Overstreet, 115 F. App'x 813, 816-17 (6th Cir. 2004).

The Notice of Removal purports to remove this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b), which provides that "[a]ny civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the Constitution, treaties or laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties. Any other such action shall be removable only if none of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought." This action is a criminal case, not a civil action.*fn4 Criminal cases may be removed in only limited circumstances, none of which are applicable here. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442(a), 1442a, 1443.

Because this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the matter, the case is REMANDED to the Shelby County Criminal Court. The Clerk is directed to close the case without entry of a judgment.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d), orders remanding a case to state court for want of subject-matter jurisdiction are not appealable.

The Clerk is directed, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), to mail a certified copy of this order to the Clerk of the Shelby County Criminal Court.

S. Thomas Anderson

[wserra]

The Notice of Removal (Diversity), which is largely incomprehensible

It is indeed. Still, the denizens of Q should not be deprived of such authentic frontier gibberish. According to Farmer, his state arrest on various traffic charges violates State Department regs, the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts, his "absolute immunity as a corporation", the Eleventh Amendment, the judge's oath of office, the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act, the state court's SMJ, the dead man's statute, various rules of standing, the statute of frauds, "RESPA, TILA and Regulation Z", the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, the International Organization Immunities Act, the Supremacy Clause and many, many other things. As he put it in the only observation that makes any sense, "No one rises (sic) this issues (sic) because no one understands it."

I actually think that Gabby Johnson said something very similar to Farmer: "I wash born here, an I wash raished here, and dad gum it, I'm a-gonna die here, an no sidewindin', bushwackin', hornswoglin' crocker croaker is gonna rouin me bishen cutter."

BTW, that "removal" was before the same DJ who now has Farmer's indictment. Could be interesting.

[notorial dissent]

I'd say that genuinely qualifies as gibberish, frontier or otherwise. I'm still trying to figure out how he got to be and not be a corporation, and a foreign diplomat? The rest of it makes even less sense. Just as an aside, don't I remember that claiming to be a foreign diplomat when you aren't is a federal felony?

[Lambkin]

What do you mean "incomprehensible"?

The Statue of Frauds is evidentiary and I am raising it. I am raising the Statue of Fraud as a defence.

What could be clearer than that?

[The Observer]

The Statue of Frauds is evidentiary and I am raising it. I am raising the Statue of Fraud as a defence.

Sovruns into art? Who knew? And I never realized that dragging a statue into court could be a defense - valid or not.

Is this statue based on a mythical deity known for fraudulent beahvior? Loki? Pan? Puck?

Any ideas who posed as the model for the Statue of Frauds?

[wserra]

Any ideas who posed as the model for the Statue of Frauds?

The Statute of Liberty, of course.

[Famspear]

Any ideas who posed as the model for the Statue of Frauds?

The Statute of Liberty, of course.

[insert drum roll here]

[Judge Roy Bean]

...

Any ideas who posed as the model for the Statue of Frauds?

[Lambkin]

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... te]Devitoe Farmer, 45, filed an “affidavit of truth” and a quitclaim deed in the Shelby County Register’s Office in 2010 several months after moving in to the home at 4171 Sevella, which had been foreclosed on by the Federal National Mortgage Association also known as Fannie Mae.[/quote]

A Criminal Court jury convicted him of theft over $10,000, which carries prison time of three to 15 years. He will be sentenced in April by Judge James BeasleyJr.

[Kestrel]

He was looking for free long-term housing. He just got it. He gets free meals as a bonus.

[Lambkin]

Meanwhile, out on probation...
http://www.jacksonsun.com/article/20130 ... tting-case

deputies spotted 46-year-old Devitoe Farmer leaving a house that was under construction and arrested him without incident.

[Lambkin]

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... r-not-all/

A Shelby County judge blasted prosecutors Friday for not giving him all of the information he says he needed before he sentenced a squatter to serve his three-year sentence on probation.

Criminal Court Judge James Beasley Jr. said he wasn’t told about similar pending federal charges against Devitoe Farmer, 46, or that another investigation was underway by Shelby County Sheriff’s detectives involving a new allegation of squatting. The judge said he was criticized following news reports broadcasting that after he put Farmer on probation on April 22, Farmer was alleged to be living in another foreclosed house without permission.

[Gregg]

Who wants to bet he doesn't get probation this time?

[notorial dissent]

Who, Farmer or the Prosecutor??