Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Gilbert v. United States

United States District Court, District of Columbia

April 20, 2015

Walter Lee Gilbert, Petitioner,
v.
United States of America et al., Respondents.

Assign. Date: 4/20/2015

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Petitioner, a prisoner at the United States Administrative Maximum ("Supermax") facility in Florence, Colorado, has submitted a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. A district court lacking jurisdiction over a habeas petitioner's immediate custodian lacks jurisdiction over the petition. Stokes v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 374 F.3d 1235, 1239 (D.C. Cir. 2004). See Rooney v. Sec'y of Army, 405 F.3d 1029, 1032 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (habeas "jurisdiction is proper only in the district in which the immediate .. . custodian is located") (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).

This Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over petitioner's warden at Supermax, and the interest of justice would not be served by transferring the case because the petition is incomprehensible. See Mayle v. Felix, 545 U.S. 644, 649 (2005) ("Rule 2(c) of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases requires a more detailed statement [than Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure]. The habeas rule instructs the petitioner to 'specify all the grounds for relief available to [him]' and to 'state the facts supporting each ground.' "). Hence, this case will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Dated: April 13, 2015


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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