Roberts v. United States ( 2023 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DAEQUAN ISHMAIL ROBERTS, _ : Petitioner : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-0024 Vv : (JUDGE MANNION) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, _ : Respondent : MEMORANDUM l. Background Daequan Ishmael Roberts, a former inmate confined in the Allenwood Federal Correctional Institution, White Deer, Pennsylvania, filed the above captioned petition for writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2241. (Doc. 1, petition). Roberts challenges his sentence computation contending he is entitled to prior custody credit from May 2019 to October 2020 for time spent in custody that has not been credited toward another sentence. Id. A review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locater reveals that Roberts was released from custody on March 30, 2023. See https:/Awww.bop.gov/inmateloc/. For the reasons set forth below, the instant petition will be dismissed as moot. ll. Discussion The case or controversy requirement of Article III, §2 of the United States Constitution subsists through all stages of federal judicial proceedings. Parties must continue to have a “personal stake in the outcome of the lawsuit.” Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477-78 (1990); Preiser _v. Newkirk, 422 U.S. 395, 401 (1975). In other words, throughout the course of the action, the aggrieved party must suffer or be threatened with actual injury caused by the defendant. Lewis, 494 U.S. at 477. The adjudicatory power of a federal court depends upon “the continuing existence of a live and acute controversy.” Steffel v. Thompson, 415 U.S. 452, 459 (1974) (emphasis in original). “The rule in federal cases is that an actual controversy must be extant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the complaint is filed.” Id. at n.10 (citations omitted). “Past exposure to illegal conduct is insufficient to sustain a present case or controversy ... if unaccompanied by continuing, present adverse effects.” Rosenberg v. Meese, 622 F.Supp. 1451, 1462 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (citing O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488 (1974)). “[A] petition for habeas corpus relief generally becomes moot when a prisoner is released from custody before the court has addressed the merits of the petition.” Lane v. Williams, 455 U.S. 624, 631 (1982). In the instant case, because Malede has been released from custody, his habeas petition has been rendered moot. See Rodriguez-Leon v. Warden, 602 F. App’x 854 (3d Cir. 2015); Scott_v. Schuylkill FCl, 298 F. App’x 202 (3d Cir. 2008); Scott v. Holt, 297 F. App’x 154 (3d Cir. 2008). lll. Conclusion For the reasons stated above, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus will be DISMISSED. An appropriate order will follow. ) (bthad (mA MALAGHY E. MANNION United States District Judge Date: April, 2023 22-0024-01