Jones v. Warden

Filing 2

ORDER denying petition for writ of habeas corpus without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Mary S. Scriven on 5/18/2011. (AJM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION

DERRICK R. JONES,
Petitioner,
v.

CASE NO. 6:11-cv-538-Orl-35GJK

WARDEN,
Respondent.
/
ORDER
Petitioner initiated this action for habeas corpus relief, however, it is not clear
whether the action is being brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Petitioner state that he is currently incarcerated at the Orange County jail as a result of
criminal charges pending against him in state court and that he has been wrongfully denied
release on bail. He claims that the Orange County jail refused to release him because of
a federal warrant pending against him in another county; however, according to Petitioner,
no “warrant [has been] signed for [his] arrest nor [are there] any pending indictments. It
is apparent that Petitioner is not attacking a judgment of conviction entered by the state
court; rather, he seeks to be released from jail until the commencement of his state court
criminal trial.
In the event that Petitioner is seeking relief under section 2254, the Court notes that
section 2254(a) provides as follows:
(a)The Supreme Court, a Justice thereof, a circuit judge, or a district

court shall entertain an application for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of a
person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the
ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties
of the United States.
(Emphasis added). "The purpose of section 2254 is clear--to require state convictions
to meet federal constitutional requirements applicable to the states." Smith v. McCotter,
786 F.2d 697, 700 (5th Cir. 1986) (emphasis added). Because there has been no
judgment of conviction entered by the state court, this Court is without jurisdiction to
entertain the instant petition under section 2254.
In the event that Petitioner is seeking relief under section 2241, he must, as a matter
of comity, exhaust his claims prior to bringing a section 2241 action. See Dickerson v.
Louisiana, 816 F.2d 220, 226 (5th Cir. 1987). In this case, the Court finds nothing to
suggest that he has fully exhausted his state court remedies. Further, Petitioner has not
shown that he has been unable to obtain relief from the state trial court or the state
appellate court. Therefore, the Court is unable to consider the merits of Petitioner's case
under section 2241.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1.

The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Derrick R. Jones is DENIED

without prejudice to the right of Petitioner to refile the petition when a judgment of
conviction has been entered by the state court or Petitioner has exhausted his state court
remedies.

2

2.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Orlando, Florida, this 18th day of May 2011.

Copies to:
OrlP-2 5/18
Derrick R. Jones
Counsel of Record

3