Cortez Jermain Brown, or how he presents himself in court cases: “:Cortez-Jermaine: of the House of :Brown” argues here that the court rejected his lengthy pleading too quickly. Specifically, he says the time it takes to review the petition should be in accordance with its length.
He filed an appeal that was hundreds of pages and a good portion were recognizable sovereign citizen arguments that have repeatedly been found to have no legal merit. He appealed saying that the court should have taken longer than two days to reject his petition. The court disagrees.
“Notably, defendant does not—and, really, cannot—claim that the trial court could not have reviewed the petition at all, but only that it could not have reviewed all claims in sufficient depth. Provided that some review was possible, we deem it inappropriate to decide what amount of time would be necessary for a sufficiently complete review. Any such attempt on our part would unreasonably limit the flexibility of trial courts in dealing with lengthy but clearly nonmeritorious claims.
For these reasons, we decline to infer from the timing of the dismissal that the court inadequately considered defendant’s postconviction claims.”
You can read the case here. It is a very worthy read since it addresses the logic of some of the sovereign citizen arguments, explain why they are wrong and also discusses the nature of sovereign citizen pleadings in general.