SANCHEZ v. KNIGHT

• Court: District Court, D. New Jersey
• Decided: August 18, 2023
• Docket: 1:23-cv-01311
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CESAR SANCHEZ, | Civil Action No. 23-1311 (SMW) Petitioner, : v. MEMORANDUM ORDER WARDEN STEVIE M. KNIGHT, : Respondent. :

This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner Cesar Sanchez’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) Following an order to answer, the Government filed a response to the petition (ECF No. 7). By way of background, in his petition, Petitioner sought to challenge a prison disciplinary charge for attempted escape on Due Process Grounds. (ECF No. 1.) As relief, Petitioner sought the vacating of the charge and the return of 27 days of good conduct credits he lost as punishment for the charge. (ECF No, 1-1 at 5.) In its response to Petitioner’s habeas petition, the Government filed a letter in which it informs the Court that, On May 17, 2023, the BOP granted Petitioner’s appeal of the disciplinary charge in question, expunged the escape charge and resulting sanctions, and returned to Petitioner the 27 days of credits he had lost. (ECF No. 7 at 1-2.) Petitioner was thereafter released from prison on May 30, 2023. Cd. at 1.) As Petitioner has been released, and received the relief he sought in the form of the expunging of the escape charge, the Government contends that this matter has become moot. (/d.) Under Article II] of the Constitution, federal courts will only have jurisdiction over a matter where there is a live case or controversy to be resolved. See, e.g., Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998). “This case-or-controversy requirement subsists through all stages of federal judicial

proceedings [and for jurisdiction to exist the] parties must continue to have a ‘personal stake in the outcome of the lawsuit.” Jd. (quoting Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477-78 (1990)). Thus, where events provide a petitioner with the relief he sought and render a habeas petition incapable of providing meaningful relief, that petition must be dismissed as moot. See, é..2., Rodney v. Mukasey, 340 F, App’x 761, 764 (3d Cir. 2009); Nunes vy. Decker, 480 F. App’x 173, 175 (3d Cir, 2012); Sanchez v. Att’y Gen., 146 F. App’x 547, 549 (Gd Cir. 2005). In this matter, Petitioner sought only to have his escape charge expunged and have his credits restored to him. The documents the Government has provided (ECF No. 7-1) clearly indicate that Petitioner’s charge has been overturned administratively, Petitioner received his credits, and petitioner was ultimately released from prison on May 30, 2023. (Ud. at 13.) As such, Petitioner has already received the relief he sought, this Court is without a meaningful opportunity to provide him relief, and this matter is therefore moot and must be dismissed as such. IT IS THEREFORE on this 18" day of August, 2023, ORDERED that Petitioner’s habeas petition (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot; and it is finally ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order upon the Government electronically and upon Petitioner by regular mail, and shall CLOSE the file.

STA Sor ne Hon. Karen M. Williams, United States District Judge