WILLIAMS v. WHITAKER (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

David WILLIAMS, Appellant v. Matthew G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General, Appellee

No. 18-5258

Decided: February 14, 2019

BEFORE: Rogers and Wilkins, Circuit Judges; Sentelle, Senior Circuit Judge

Warden (Terminal Island), Federal Correctional Institution, San Pedro, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant. David Williams, San Pedro, CA, pro se. R. Craig Lawrence, U.S. Attorney's Office, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee.

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief, appendix, and supplements filed by the 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 April 2, 2018 be affirmed. Because appellant is a federal prisoner in California, the district court properly dismissed appellant's petition for lack of jurisdiction over appellant's custodian. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 434, 443-47, 124 S.Ct. 2711, 159 L.Ed.2d 513 (2004); Day v. Trump, 860 F.3d 686, 689, 691 (D.C. Cir. 2017).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.

Per Curiam

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law