Benjamin v. Ashcroft

D.C. Circuit

Benjamin v. Ashcroft

111 F. App'x 615

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedNovember 1, 2004

DocketNo. 04-5167

StatusPublished

This text of 111 F. App'x 615 (Benjamin v. Ashcroft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Benjamin v. Ashcroft, 111 F. App'x 615 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed March 25, 2004 be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed appellant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for lack of jurisdiction, as appellant must file any request for relief under § 2241 in the district court having jurisdiction over his warden. See, e.g., Rumsfeld v. Padilla, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2711, 159 L.Ed.2d 513 (2004).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

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

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed March 25, 2004 be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed appellant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for lack of jurisdiction, as appellant must file any request for relief under § 2241 in the district court having jurisdiction over his warden. See, e.g., Rumsfeld v. Padilla, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2711, 159 L.Ed.2d 513 (2004).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 F. App'x 615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benjamin-v-ashcroft-cadc-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack