Thomas Labuwi, II v. Eric Bradley (4th Cir. 2023). · Go Syfert
Thomas Labuwi, II v. Eric Bradley (4th Cir. 2023). Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Thomas Labuwi, II
v.
Eric Bradley
22-6678.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Mar 21, 2023.
Unpublished
1

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6678

THOMAS WALKER LABUWI, II,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

ERIC BRADLEY, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:21-hc-02210-FL)

Submitted: March 16, 2023 Decided: March 21, 2023

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Walker Labuwi, II, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Walker Labuwi, II—a federal prisoner who was convicted and sentenced in the Eastern District of North Carolina but who is presently incarcerated in the Northern

District of West Virginia—filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in the North Carolina district court, which the court denied. A district court may only grant habeas relief within its jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241(a), 2242; Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 442-43

(2004). Because Labuwi is incarcerated in the Northern District of West Virginia, jurisdiction over his § 2241 petition lies in that district—not in the district court below.

See Padilla, 542 U.S. at 442-44.

Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s order and remand for the district court to

determine whether transferring Labuwi’s § 2241 petition would serve the interest of justice, see 28 U.S.C. §§ 1406(a), 1631, or whether the petition is more appropriately dismissed without prejudice to refiling in the appropriate district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED

[*2]