Yury Armando Cabreja Peña v. Warden, Stewart Detention Center, and Field Officer Director, ICE-ERO

Summary

The court considered a pro se petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging the petitioner’s immigration detention. Applying the immediate-custodian and district-of-confinement rules, the court determined that venue was improper in the Southern District of West Virginia because the petitioner was confined at Stewart Detention Center in the Middle District of Georgia when he filed the petition. The court transferred the case to the Middle District of Georgia under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) rather than dismissing it.

Holdings

1. A petitioner challenging present physical custody generally must name the immediate custodian as respondent and file the petition in the district of confinement. Because Cabreja Peña was confined in the Middle District of Georgia when he filed, venue did not lie in the Southern District of West Virginia.
2. The record did not establish an exception to the immediate-custodian and district-of-confinement rules because the court found no indication that petitioner was moved to evade jurisdiction and no other facts supporting an exception.
3. When venue is improper, transfer to the district where the case could have been brought, rather than dismissal, serves the interests of justice when the petitioner is confined there.

Questions Presented

1. Whether venue for a § 2241 petition challenging present physical custody lies in the district of confinement when the petitioner filed after being transferred to that district.
2. Whether any exception to the immediate-custodian and district-of-confinement rules justified retaining the petition in the Southern District of West Virginia.
3. Whether the case should be dismissed or transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) when venue is improper.

Disposition

transferred