Alston v. Adams

178 F. App'x 295
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 4, 2006
Docket05-7844
StatusUnpublished
Cited by40 cases

This text of 178 F. App'x 295 (Alston v. Adams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alston v. Adams, 178 F. App'x 295 (4th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Lucius Edward Aston, Jr., filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition against Vanessa Adams, the warden at the Peters-burg Federal Correctional Complex, challenging the fact that when his federal detention ended he would be turned over to Virginia authorities. Aston contends that he owes Virginia no time. While this appeal was pending, Aston was released from federal custody and is now being held by Virginia authorities.

The Constitution limits the jurisdiction of federal courts to actual cases or contro *296 versies. U.S. Const. art. III, § 2; Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 317, 108 S.Ct. 592, 98 L.Ed.2d 686 (1988). The controversy must be present at all stages of review. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 66, 117 S.Ct. 1055, 137 L.Ed.2d 170 (1997). When a case becomes moot after judgment in the district court, the appellate court has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Mellen v. Bunting, 327 F.3d 355, 363-64 (4th Cir.2003).

As Alston is no longer held in federal custody, his action against Adams is moot. Any relief he seeks against Virginia must be filed against a state defendant after exhaustion of his state remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Juvonta Lafond v. FCI Beckley Warden
S.D. West Virginia, 2026
Lachaunti Williams v. W. Holzapfel
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Brodie v. Warden
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Davis v. Warden
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Rosser-Burch v. Holzapfel
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Carter v. Warden
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Matthews v. Warden
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Rush v. Heckard
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Overly v. Holzapfel
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Baisi v. Aldridge
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Anderson v. Holzapfel
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Hagler v. Heckard
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Gates v. Holzapfel
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Monti v. Gaal
S.D. West Virginia, 2025
Davis v. Holzapfel
S.D. West Virginia, 2025

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
178 F. App'x 295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alston-v-adams-ca4-2006.