Opinion
Civil Action 23-12817-RGS
11-21-2023
THOMAS LARSON v. NAPIER
ORDER
RICHARD G. STEARNS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pro se litigant Thomas Larson, who is a pretrial confined at FMC Devens, has filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Dkt #1, in which he asks that criminal charges against him pending in the United States District Court for the District of Montana, see United States v. Larson, Crim. No. 22-cr-00079 (D. Mont.), be dismissed. According to Larson, his continued detention is in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d), which provides that, where a defendant is found to be incompetent to stand trial, the Attorney General “shall hospitalize the defendant for treatment in a suitable facility - (1) for a reasonable period of time, not to exceed four months,” to determine whether he can be restored to competency. 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d)(1). Larson represents that he has been committed under this statute for more than four months.
The court DENIES the petition without prejudice. Whether Larson's detention contravenes 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d)(1) is a matter for the judicial officer pending over the criminal action, rather than for this court. See, e.g., Reese v. Warden Philadelphia FDC, 904 F.3d 244, 246 (3d Cir. 2018) (stating that “[i]t is well settled that in the absence of exceptional circumstances in criminal cases the regular judicial procedure should be followed and habeas corpus should not be granted in advance of a trial” (quoting Jones v. Perkins, 245 U.S. 390, 391 (1918))); Whitmer v. Levi, 276 Fed. App'x 217, 219 (3d Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (finding that petitioner's “claims relating to pending criminal charges should have been raised in his criminal case, not a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241”); Garey v. Fed. Det. Ctr., 180 Fed. App'x 118, 121 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of § 2241 petition because petitioner's claims “should have been raised in his pending criminal case”).
Accordingly, the court DENIES the petition and DISMISSES this action.
SO ORDERED.