Opinion
Case No. 4:17cv323-MW/CAS
07-19-2017
EDUARDO CABRERA SERRANO, Petitioner, v. JEFF SESSIONS, Respondent.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner submitted filed a document to this Court which is liberally construed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to § 2241 because Petitioner seeks release from detention. ECF No. 1. The factual allegations of the petition are not clear, and the document is barely legible. Nevertheless, it appears that Petitioner is being held in immigration detention following a criminal conviction. ECF No. 1 at 1, 4. Petitioner seeks release from that detention. Id. at 2.
Petitioner is detained in the Baker County Detention Center in Baker, Florida. Id. at 1-2, 4. Baker County is not located within the jurisdiction of the Northern District of Florida; rather, it is in the Middle District of Florida.
"For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have consented." 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Because a § 2241 should be filed where the Petitioner is housed, this case should be transferred to the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, which encompasses Baker County, Florida.
Additionally, Petitioner did not pay the filing fee for this case, nor did he submit a motion requesting leave to proceed with in forma pauperis status. That issue should be resolved by the Middle District.
In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, for all further proceedings.
IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on July 19, 2017.
S/ Charles A. Stampelos
CHARLES A. STAMPELOS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, a party may serve and file specific written objections to these proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the objections shall be served upon all other parties. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the Court's internal use only and does not control. If a party fails to object to the Magistrate Judge's findings or recommendations as to any particular claim or issue contained in this Report and Recommendation, that party waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court's order based on the unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.