Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 27, 2025

Adorno v. Nessigner

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:24-cv-09760
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Adorno v. Nessinger, Judge Caproni postponed the Government’s deadline while addressing where Adorno’s federal custody petition should proceed after his transfers.

Who this affects

Hector Adorno, Warden Michael Nessinger, and the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.

What happened

In Adorno v. Nessinger, Hector Adorno challenged a disciplinary proceeding that occurred while he was incarcerated at Wyatt Detention Facility in Rhode Island. He asked the court to cancel the resulting disciplinary actions and release him immediately.

After Adorno filed the petition, he was transferred to facilities in New York, Oklahoma, and Colorado. The opinion explains that a federal court generally may decide this type of custody petition only when the prisoner and the person holding him are within the court’s territory.

Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the Clerk to notify the Southern District of New York’s Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office. She moved the Government’s deadline to provide transfer dates and propose next steps from January 24 to February 7, 2025, and directed that the orders be mailed to Adorno. The court did not decide the merits of his challenge.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Adorno v. Nessigner · No. 1:24-cv-09760
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Jan. 27, 2025

Background

Hector Adorno filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a procedure for challenging federal custody, and asked to remain at Wyatt Detention Facility while the petition was pending. He alleged that a disciplinary proceeding at Wyatt violated due process and sought cancellation of the resulting disciplinary actions and immediate release from custody.

The petition was placed in the prison mail system on November 21, 2024, and was later filed in the District of Rhode Island. After Adorno was transferred to a residential re-entry center in New York, the petition was transferred to the Southern District of New York. He was later transferred to FTC Oklahoma City and then to United States Penitentiary, Florence High, in Colorado.

Jurisdictional issue

The opinion states that, generally, a Section 2241 petition may be decided only in the district where the petitioner is physically present and held in custody, and where the custodian is within the court’s legal reach. Because Adorno had been transferred multiple times, the court sought information about the dates of those transfers and the appropriate next steps. The opinion did not decide whether the court ultimately had jurisdiction or whether Adorno’s disciplinary challenge was legally valid.

Order

Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the Clerk to electronically notify the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York that the order had been issued. The Government’s deadline to submit a letter identifying the transfer dates and proposing next steps was moved retroactively from January 24, 2025, to February 7, 2025. The Clerk was also directed to mail this order and an earlier order to Adorno at the Colorado prison. The order did not grant or deny Adorno’s requested release or other merits relief.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.