Case Name: Lucius Edward ALSTON, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Vanessa ADAMS, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-05-04
Citations: 178 F. App'x 295
Docket Number: No. 05-7844
Parties: Lucius Edward ALSTON, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Vanessa ADAMS, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 178
Pages: 295–296

Head Matter:
Lucius Edward ALSTON, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Vanessa ADAMS, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 05-7844.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 27, 2006.
Decided: May 4, 2006.
Lucius Edward Aston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Lucius Edward Aston, Jr., filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition against Vanessa Adams, the warden at the Peters-burg Federal Correctional Complex, challenging the fact that when his federal detention ended he would be turned over to Virginia authorities. Aston contends that he owes Virginia no time. While this appeal was pending, Aston was released from federal custody and is now being held by Virginia authorities.
The Constitution limits the jurisdiction of federal courts to actual cases or contro versies. U.S. Const. art. III, § 2; Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 317, 108 S.Ct. 592, 98 L.Ed.2d 686 (1988). The controversy must be present at all stages of review. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 66, 117 S.Ct. 1055, 137 L.Ed.2d 170 (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). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED