Younoussa v. Smith

Full title: BARRY YOUNOUSSA, Petitioner v. CHRISTIAN SMITH, Respondent

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Aug 14, 2017

CIVIL NO. 3:CV-17-1403 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 14, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL NO. 3:CV-17-1403

08-14-2017

BARRY YOUNOUSSA, Petitioner v. CHRISTIAN SMITH, Respondent

Judge Conaboy

() MEMORANDUM

Background

This pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 was filed by Barry Younoussa, an inmate presently confined at the Cambria County Prison, Ebensburg, Pennsylvania. The required filing fee has not been paid and an in forma pauperis application has not been filed. For the reasons outlined herein, Petitioner's action will be transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

Named as sole Respondent is Warden Christian Smith of the Cambria County Prison.¹ Petitioner initiated this action regarding his ongoing detention by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at the Cambria County Prison.

1 The only properly named Respondent in a federal habeas corpus action is Petitioner's custodial official, in this case Warden Smith. See 28 U.S.C. § 2242. --------

Younoussa's present action does not challenge the legality of his deportation but, rather, his indefinite detention pending removal. Petitioner indicates that his removal within the foreseeable future is unlikely as he has an appeal pending before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). He appears to be asserting that his detention in ICE custody while awaiting deportation violates his constitutional rights pursuant to the standards announced in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). He seeks his release on bond. See Doc. 1, p.11.

Discussion

Relief pursuant to § 2241 may only be sought in the district court having jurisdiction over a petitioner's custodian. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S.426, 442 (2004)(jurisdiction for habeas corpus petitions challenging present physical confinement lies in only one district; the district of confinement); Braden v. 30^th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 494-95 (1973).

Petitioner's present place of confinement, the Cambria County Prison, is located within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. See 28 U.S.C. § 118(c).

As such, this Court lacks jurisdiction over Warden Smith. A court may transfer any civil action for the convenience of the parties or witnesses, or in the interest of justice, to any district where the action might have been brought. 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Consequently, this matter will be transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania pursuant to § 1404(a). An appropriate Order will enter.

/s/_________

RICHARD P. CONABOY

United States District Judge DATED: AUGUST 14^th 2017