Muse v. Warden

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: August 20, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-06691
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ABDUWALI ABDUKHADIR MUSE, Petitioner, 25-CV-6691 (LTS) -against- TRANSFER ORDER WARDEN, FCI CUMBERLAND, Respondent. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Petitioner, currently incarcerated at Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) Cumberland in Maryland, brings this action pro se. Petitioner initiated this action as a letter to District Judge Loretta A. Preska, who presided over his criminal proceedings, United States v. Muse, No. 09- CR-0512 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2011). Judge Preska directed that the application be opened on the docket as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF 2.) For the following reasons, this petition is transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. In order to entertain a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a court must have jurisdiction over the custodian. See Braden v. 30th Jud. Cir. Ct. of Ky., 410 U.S. 484, 494-95 (1973) (writ of habeas corpus does not act upon the prisoner who seek relief, but upon his or her custodian). Thus, the jurisdiction of a habeas petition challenging a petitioner’s physical confinement generally lies in the district of his confinement. Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 442 (2004). Petitioner is currently detained at FCI Cumberland, which is located in the judicial district of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. 28 U.S.C. § 100. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Court transfers this petition to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Whether Petitioner should be permitted to proceed further without payment of fees is a determination to be made by the transferee court.1 This order closes the case

in the Southern District of New York. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. Dated: August 20, 2025 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

1 Petitioner did not pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis.