United States District Court, D. New Hampshire
Richard Maximus Strahan, pro se Corey M. Belobrow, Esq. J.
Joseph McKittrick, Esq. Eric Alexander Maher, Esq.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
K. JOHNSTONE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
the court are documents (Doc. No. 1) filed by Richard Maximus
Strahan, removing a pending misdemeanor prosecution from the
New Hampshire Circuit Court to this court. The matter is here
for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1455 and LR 4.3(d)(3).
criminal defendants may remove state criminal prosecutions to
federal court in rare circumstances. See 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1442 (criminal prosecutions against federal
agencies and officers), 1442(a) (criminal prosecution against
members of the armed services), 1443 (denial of racial
equality in state criminal prosecutions). A federal statute,
28 U.S.C. § 1455(b), sets out the procedures which apply
when state prosecutions are removed.
1455(b)(4) authorizes the court to remand summarily those
state criminal prosecutions that do not appear on the face of
the removal documents to be properly removed to this court:
The United States district court in which such notice [of
removal] is filed shall examine the notice promptly. If it
clearly appears on the face of the notice and any exhibits
annexed thereto that removal should not be permitted, the
court shall make an order for summary remand.
Id. § 1455(b)(4). See also LR 4.3(d)(3)
(initial filings of pro se removal defendants, not proceeding
in forma pauperis, are forwarded to magistrate judge for
preliminary review to determine if court has subject matter
jurisdiction). Given Strahan's pro se status, this court
construes his notice of removal liberally. See Erickson
v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam).
was arraigned in May 2017 in a state criminal case, State
v. Strahan, No. 432-2017-CR-1148 (N.H. Cir. Ct., 7th
Cir., Dist. Div.-Dover (“Dover District Court”)),
on charges arising from an incident in Lee, New Hampshire:
specifically, a charged misdemeanor offense of leaving the
scene of an accident involving damage to another car, and a
violation of the state law prohibiting the use of a hand-held
cellphone while driving. In his notice of removal, Strahan
alleges discriminatory police enforcement and discriminatory
prosecution as to the laws he is charged with violating.
Strahan asserts that he is being prosecuted out of a
“hateful discriminatory animus . . . for his bringing
lawsuits against the police, for being indigent, and owing to
his race.” Doc. No. 1, at 2. His “race, ”
which he calls, “White Negro, ” includes
“indigent peoples not born nor raised in . . . New
Hampshire.” Id. Strahan asserts that the
presiding judge in the state prosecution has ruled that the
court will not hear Strahan's civil rights claims against
the police and prosecutor in the context of the state
notice of removal of a criminal prosecution must be filed
within thirty days of arraignment or before trial, whichever
is earlier, except that the federal court may extend that
deadline for good cause.” 28 U.S.C. § 1455(b)(1).
Strahan's filing of removal documents occurred in
December 2017, approximately six months after the expiration
of the 30-day time limit set by § 1455(b)(1). Strahan
has asserted that the belated removal should ...