From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tate v. Jordan

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Mar 15, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-123, Section "I" (1) (E.D. La. Mar. 15, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06-123, Section "I" (1).

March 15, 2006


ORDER AND REASONS


Before the Court is a motion to reconsider filed by pro se petitioner, Tyrone Tate, a pre-trial detainee presently detained at the Winn Correctional Center in Winnfield, Louisiana. The Court dismissed Washington's application for writ of habeas corpus, without prejudice, because of a lack of jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED.

Rec. Doc. No. 1.

Rec. Doc. No. 2. The Court did not address the merits of petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus.

Petitioner's motion to reconsider further evidences that he was not convicted or sentenced in the Eastern District of Louisiana, and that he was not incarcerated in this district at the time he filed his habeas application. In fact, petitioner is still confined in Winn Parish at the Winn Correctional Center in Winnfield, Louisiana, which is within the boundaries of the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. See 28 U.S.C. § 98(c).

Petitioner has failed to provide the Court any basis on which to reconsider its determination that the Eastern District of Louisiana lacks jurisdiction over his § 2241 petition. The Court notes, however, that it dismissed Tate's petition without prejudice, and that petitioner may re-file his petition in the proper forum. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion to reconsider filed by Tyrone Tate is DENIED.


Summaries of

Tate v. Jordan

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Mar 15, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-123, Section "I" (1) (E.D. La. Mar. 15, 2006)
Case details for

Tate v. Jordan

Case Details

Full title:TYRONE TATE v. EDDIE JORDAN, ORLEANS PARISH DISTRICT ATTORNEY

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana

Date published: Mar 15, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 06-123, Section "I" (1) (E.D. La. Mar. 15, 2006)

Citing Cases

Chicago Railway Co. v. Merchants' Bank

Another class of cases which will doubtless be urged as holding a doctrine adverse to that we here contend…

Hammond v. American Express Co.

Carlin v. Knealey, 12 M. W. 139; Ernst v. Steckmann, 74 Pa. St. 13. But the point was made below, that,…