Alston v. Adams, No. 05-7844 (4th Cir. 2006)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7844 LUCIUS EDWARD ALSTON, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus VANESSA ADAMS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-551-1) Submitted: April 27, 2006 Decided: May 4, 2006 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lucius Edward Alston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Lucius Edward Alston, Jr., filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition against Vanessa Adams, the warden at the Petersburg Federal Correctional Complex, challenging the fact that when his federal detention ended he would be turned over to Virginia authorities. Alston contends that he owes Virginia no time. While this appeal was pending, Alston was released from federal custody and is now being held by Virginia authorities. The Constitution limits the jurisdiction courts to actual cases or controversies. federal U.S. Const. art. III, § 2; Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 317 (1988). be present at all stages of review. of The controversy must Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 66 (1997). When a case becomes moot after judgment in the district court, the appellate court has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Mellen v. Bunting, 327 F.3d 355, 363-64 (4th Cir. 2003). As Alston is no longer held in federal custody, his action against Adams is moot. Any relief he seeks against Virginia must be filed against a state defendant after exhaustion of his state remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). the appeal as moot. facts and materials legal before Accordingly, we dismiss We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. DISMISSED - 2 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.