Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Reyes v. Entzel

United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia

January 30, 2019

REINALDO REYES, Petitioner,
v.
ENTZEL, Warden, Respondent.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          ROBERT W. TRUMBLE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         On March 21, 2018, the pro se petitioner filed a Petition[1] pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody. ECF No. 1. At the time this matter was filed, Petitioner was a federal inmate housed at Hazelton FCI in Bruceton Mills, West Virginia. This matter is pending before the undersigned for an initial review and Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule of Prisoner Litigation Part 2.

         II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         A. Petitioners' Conviction and Sentence[2]

         On March 28, 2014, in the Southern District of New York, Petitioner entered a plea of guilty to a superseding information which charged him with conspiracy to commit robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. ECF No. 86. On July 2, 2014, Petitioner was sentenced to 60 months of incarceration. ECF No. 107.

         B. Petitioner's Direct Appeal

         A review of PACER shows that Petitioner did not appeal his criminal conviction.

         III. LEGAL STANDARD

         Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and this Court's local rules, the undersigned is authorized to review such petitions for relief and submit findings and recommendations to the District Court. This Court is charged with screening Petitioner's case to determine if “it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the U.S. District Courts; see also Rule 1(b) Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the U.S. District Courts (a district court may apply these rules to a habeas corpus petition not filed pursuant to § 2254).

         IV. ANALYSIS

         The Petitioner, federal inmate number 83501-083[3], filed a habeas corpus claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(1), “The writ of habeas corpus shall not extend to a prisoner unless-(1) He is in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States or is committed for trial before some court thereof.” According to the Bureau of Prisons' Inmate Locator service, Petitioner was released from custody on October 11, 2018. https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/.

         This Court lacks jurisdiction because Petitioner is no longer in custody of the United States. In Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 94 - 95 (1998), the Supreme Court wrote that “without jurisdiction the court cannot proceed at all in any cause. Jurisdiction is power to declare the law, and when it ceases to exist, the only function remaining to the court is that of announcing the fact and dismissing the cause.” See also Reinbold v. Evers, 187 F.3d 348, 359 n. 10 (4th Cir. 1999). Because this court lacks jurisdiction, this court cannot entertain the petition.

         V. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.