Riley v. Eichenlaub, No. 3:2012cv00866 - Document 2 (E.D. Va. 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Richard D Bennett on 12/4/12. (c/m af 12/4/12)(amf, Deputy Clerk) [Transferred from Maryland on 12/4/2012.]
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND KENNETH B. RILEY, # 51603-037 Petitioner v IKE EICHENLAUB Respondent * * Civil Action No. RDB-12-3536 * * * * * * * *** MEMORANDUM OPINION Pending is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by self-represented Petitioner Kenneth B. Riley, an inmate at FCC Petersburg, Virginia. After preliminary review, this Court will order this matter transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Riley was sentenced to 30 months imprisonment for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute hydrocodone in United States v. Riley, Criminal Action No. RDB-100324 (D. Md. 2011) In support of the instant Petition, Riley avers the following. In June of 2012, he was transferred to a Residential Reentry Center in Baltimore. On the eve of his release to home detention, he was served with a summons issued in the District Court for Baltimore County for telephone harassment and misuse. Riley states the summons was based on charges filed by his estranged wife who suffers from a mental disorder. Based on the charges, a hearing officer found Riley guilty of a prohibited act in violation of Bureau of Prison rules and he was removed from the RDAP and the six month reward for successful completion of the program was forfeited. On November 14, 2012, the District Court for Baltimore County dismissed the charges nolle prosequi. Riley filed this Petition on November 29, 2012. Habeas corpus relief for is available for prisoners who are in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). The Fourth Circuit has recognized that challenges to the execution of a federal sentence are properly brought under § 2241. United States v. Little, 392 F.3d 671, 679 (4th Cir.2004) (quoting Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 495 (1973)). A petitioner seeking judicial review of the execution of his sentence under § 2241 should name his warden as respondent and file the petition in the district of confinement. Id. at 680 (quoting Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 447 (2004)). In this case, Riley is in the custody of the Warden, FCC Petersburg, a correctional facility in the Eastern District of Virginia. Consequently, this case will be transferred to the Eastern District of Virginia for consideration as may be deemed appropriate. A separate Order follows. December 4, 2012 Date ____________/s/___________________ RICHARD D. BENNETT 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.
