MYRTHIL v. ORTIZ, No. 1:2020cv16584 - Document 2 (D.N.J. 2020)
Court Description: OPINION. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 11/20/2020. (rtm, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
MYRTHIL v. ORTIZ Doc. 2 Case 1:20-cv-16584-RMB Document 2 Filed 11/20/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 42 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAMDEN VICINAGE JUDE MYRTHIL, Petitioner v. DAVID ORTIZ, Respondent : : : : : : : : : CIV. NO. 20-16584(RMB) OPINION BUMB, United States District Judge Petitioner Jude Myrthil, a prisoner confined in the Federal Correctional Facility in Fort Dix, New Jersey (“FCI Fort Dix”) brings this petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging the ability of the federal government to detain him in custody in New Jersey although he is a citizen of Massachusetts. (Pet., Dkt. No. 1.) Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Cases under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, applicable here under Rule 1, scope of the rules, a judge must promptly examine a habeas petition. “If it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court, the judge must dismiss the petition and direct the clerk to notify the petitioner.” Id. The Court takes judicial notice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201(b)(2), that Petitioner is incarcerated in federal prison, having been convicted and sentenced in the United States Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:20-cv-16584-RMB Document 2 Filed 11/20/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 43 District Court, District of New Jersey in Criminal Action No. 2:14cr-00571-CCC-1. Petitioner’s claim that a convicted federal prisoner who is a citizen of Massachusetts cannot be incarcerated in a federal prison in New Jersey is frivolous. The Court will dismiss the petition. Buried within the petition, there is some discussion of Petitioner being possession of a charged hazardous violating tool. a prison Petitioner rule has not governing provided sufficient information for this Court to address a due process challenge to the loss of Good Conduct Time as a result of a prison disciplinary proceeding. See e.g. Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974); Denny v. Schultz, 708 F.3d 140 (3d Cir. 2013). Dismissal of this petition is without prejudice to Petitioner filing an amended petition to raise a due process claim with respect to the loss of good conduct time. An appropriate Order follows. Date: November 20, 2020 s/Renée Marie Bumb RENÉE MARIE BUMB United States District Judge 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.
