Feurtado v. Strada

Filing 13

ORDER DISMISSING CASE, The Petition (Dkt. 1 ) is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Government is DIRECTED to serve a copy of this Order on Petitioner and file proof of service with the Clerk of Court. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 7/18/2017. (fwd'd for jgm) (Lee, Tiffeny)

9tf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-X

ANTHONY FEURTADO,
Petitioner,

ORDER

-against-

13-CV-989(NGG)

WARDEN FRANK STRADA,

Respondent.
—X

NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS,United States District Judge.
On February 21, 2013,Petitioner Anthony Feurtado filed a pro se petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the "Petition"), alleging that he should be released

from custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center (the"MDC")on April 17, 2013, and

permitted to move to a residential reentry center or to home detention.^ (Pet.(Dkt. 1).) On
April 26, 2013,Petitioner was released from the MDC(see Gov't Opp'n to Pet.(Dkt. 8)at 2),
and began serving a three-year term of supervised release. Petitioner's term of supervised
release ended on April 25,2016. (See May 24, 2017,Ltr. firom Gov't(Dkt. 11).)
The Petition is DISMISSED as moot. "[I]f an event occurs while [a matter] is pending

that renders it impossible for the court to grant any form of effectual reliefto [Petitioner], the
matter becomes moot and subject matter jurisdiction is lost." In re Flanagan. 503 F.3d 171, 178

(2d Cir. 2007)(citing Altman v. Bedford Cent. Sch. Dist.. 245 F.3d 49,69(2d Cir. 2001)and
Church of Scientoloev of Cal. v. United States. 506 U.S. 9, 12(1992)). Because Petitioner has
been released fi*om custody and completed his term ofsupervised release, he no longer "retains
an interest in [the Petition] so that a favorable outcome could redound in [his] favor." Id (citing

'
Petitioner admits that he did not exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing the Petition. Qd at 2.)
1

Firefighters Local Union No. 1784 v. Stotts. 467 U.S. 561, 568-72(1984)). As such, the Petition
is moot.

id; see also, e.g.. Sash v. Laird No. 06-CV-6052(LB),2008 WL 2816019, at *1-2

(E.D.N.Y. 2008)(holding that habeas petition was moot where the petitioner had been release
firom custody and the petition sought transfer out ofthe MDC to "an approved correctional
facility at which [he] could receive necessary medical care and treatment");^United States v.
Kleiner. 765 F.3d 155,156 n.l (2d Cir. 2014)(holding appeal of defendant's sentence was not
moot even though he had been released from prison "because a favorable appellate decision
might prompt the district court to reduce [defendant's] three-year term of supervised release").
The Petition(Dkt. 1)is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The

Government is DIRECTED to serve a copy ofthis Order on Petitioner and file proof of service
with the Clerk of Court.
SO ORDERED.

Dated: Brooklyn, New York
tKiyn,

July I 0 ,2017

> tCHOLAS G. GARAUFI^^
United States District Judge

9tf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-X

ANTHONY FEURTADO,
Petitioner,

ORDER

-against-

13-CV-989(NGG)

WARDEN FRANK STRADA,

Respondent.
X

NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS, United States District Judge.

On February 21, 2013,Petitioner Anthony Feurtado filed a pro se petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the "Petition"), alleging that he should be released
from custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center (the"MDC")on April 17, 2013, and

permitted to move to a residential reentry center or to home detention.^ (Pet.(Dkt. 1).) On
April 26,2013,Petitioner was released from the MDC(see Gov't Opp'n to Pet.(Dkt. 8)at 2),
and began serving a three-year term of supervised release. Petitioner's term of supervised
release ended on April 25,2016. (See May 24,2017, Ltr. from Gov't(Dkt. 11).)
The Petition is DISMISSED as moot. "[l]f an event occurs while [a matter] is pending

that renders it impossible for the court to grant any form of effectual reliefto [Petitioner], the
matter becomes moot and subject matter jurisdiction is lost." In re Flanagan. 503 F.3d 171,178
(2d Cir. 2007)(citing Altman v. Bedford Cent. Sch. Dist.. 245 F.3d 49,69(2d Cir. 2001)and
Church of Scientoloev of Cal. v. United States. 506 U.S. 9, 12(1992)). Because Petitioner has

been released from custody and completed his term ofsupervised release, he no longer "retains
an interest in [the Petition] so that a favorable outcome could redound in [his] favor." Id (citing

'
Petitioner admits that he did not exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing the Petition. (Id at 2.)
1

Firefighters Local Umon No. 1784 v. Stotts, 467 U.S. 561,568-72(1984)). As such, the Petition
is moot.

id; see also, e.g.. Sash v. Laird, No. 06-CV-6052(LB),2008 WL 2816019, at *1-2

(E.D.N.Y. 2008)(holding that habeas petition was moot where the petitioner had been release
firom custody and the petition sought transfer out ofthe MDC to "an approved correctional
facility at which [he] could receive necessary medical care and treatment");^United States v.
Kleiner. 765 F.3d 155,156 n.l (2d Cir. 2014)(holding appeal of defendant's sentence was not
moot even though he had been released from prison "because a favorable appellate decision
might prompt the district court to reduce [defendant's] three-year term of supervised release").
The Petition(Dkt. 1)is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The

Government is DIRECTED to serve a copy ofthis Order on Petitioner and file proof of service
with the Clerk of Court.
SO ORDERED.

s/Nicholas G. Garaufis

Dated: Brooklvn, New York

T^CHOLAS G. GARAUFIS

July I 0 ,2017

United States District Judge