context: First, "|j]ust as an inmate has no justifiable expectation that he will be incarcerated in any particular prison within a State, he has no justifiable expectation that he will be incarcerated in any particular State." Second, courts have upheld transfers of inmates to private out-of-state facilities.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.parenthetical: in criminal matters, concept of full faith and credit is articulated through Extradition Clause, U.S. Const. art. IV, SS 2, cl. 2
citation_a.sentence: See Evans v. Holm, 114 F.Supp.2d 706, 711 (W.D.Tenn.2000) (“It is a popular myth among prisoners that a state’s authority over a prisoner ends at the state’s geographical border.”); cf. Blango v. Thornburgh, 942 F.2d 1487, 1491 (10th Cir.1991) (District of Columbia did not waive jurisdiction over habeas petitioner by transferring him to federal prison in Kansas). Finally, Mr. Abordo’s reliance on the Full Faith and Credit Clause is misplaced, see Michigan v. Doran, 439 U.S. 282, 287-89, 99 S.Ct. 530, 58 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (in criminal matters, concept of full faith and credit is articulated through Extradition Clause, U.S. Const. art. IV, § 2, cl. 2), and in any event, Minnesota was not enforcing Hawaii’s penal judgment.
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 114 F.Supp.2d 706, 711
citation_b.parenthetical: "It is a popular myth among prisoners that a state's authority over a prisoner ends at the state's geographical border."
citation_b.sentence: See Evans v. Holm, 114 F.Supp.2d 706, 711 (W.D.Tenn.2000) (“It is a popular myth among prisoners that a state’s authority over a prisoner ends at the state’s geographical border.”); cf. Blango v. Thornburgh, 942 F.2d 1487, 1491 (10th Cir.1991) (District of Columbia did not waive jurisdiction over habeas petitioner by transferring him to federal prison in Kansas). Finally, Mr. Abordo’s reliance on the Full Faith and Credit Clause is misplaced, see Michigan v. Doran, 439 U.S. 282, 287-89, 99 S.Ct. 530, 58 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (in criminal matters, concept of full faith and credit is articulated through Extradition Clause, U.S. Const. art. IV, § 2, cl. 2), and in any event, Minnesota was not enforcing Hawaii’s penal judgment.