Clark v. Jamison
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:23-cv-01140
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Clark v. Jamison, Judge Ramos transferred Clark’s sentence challenge to Connecticut because Clark was confined there.
Edward James Clark, whose sentence-recalculation petition was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the District of Connecticut.
What happened
In Clark v. Jamison, Edward James Clark filed a petition asking for recalculation of his sentence under the First Step Act of 2018. He was incarcerated and represented himself.
Clark was confined at FCI Danbury in Connecticut when the court considered the petition. The court explained that a petition challenging physical confinement generally belongs in the federal district where the prisoner is held because that court has authority over the custodian.
Judge Ramos transferred the petition to the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The order closed the case in the Southern District of New York, and the court denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee.
The detailed version
- Clark v. Jamison · No. 1:23-cv-01140
- Edgardo Ramos
- Mar. 27, 2023
Background
Edward James Clark filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, the federal statute that allows a prisoner to challenge the execution or calculation of a sentence. Clark sought recalculation of his sentence under the First Step Act of 2018. He filed the petition without a lawyer and paid the required filing fee after the court directed him either to pay the fee or request permission to proceed without paying it.
When Clark filed the petition, he was incarcerated at FCI Otisville in New York. Before the court ruled, he notified the court that he had been transferred to FCI Danbury in Danbury, Connecticut.
Court’s Reasoning
The court explained that a court hearing a § 2241 petition must have authority over the prisoner’s custodian. For a petition challenging a prisoner’s physical confinement, jurisdiction generally lies in the federal district where the prisoner is confined. Because Clark was confined at FCI Danbury, which is in the District of Connecticut, the Southern District of New York determined that the case should be heard there.
Ruling
The court transferred the matter to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), which permits transfer in the interest of justice. The clerk was directed to transfer the action, and the order states that the case was closed in the Southern District of New York. The court did not decide whether Clark was entitled to recalculation of his sentence. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.