DAILEY
v.
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 cannot challenge the clemency process itself, as it does not invalidate a sentence.
Petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition challenging the constitutionality of Florida's clemency process. The court noted prior proceedings in a rela…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Cognizability Of Claims In Habeas Corpus cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter is before the Court on James Dailey’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Dkt. 2. The only ground states: “The Florida Clemency Process Particularly as Applied to James Dailey Fails to Act as the Fail Safe Guaranteed by Herrera v. Collins and is so Arbitrary it Violates the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.” Id. The procedural and factual history of this matter have been discussed at length in Dailey v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t of Corr., No. 8:07-cv-01897-T-02AAS (M.D. Fla). “Petitions under § 2254 cannot be brought to challenge the process by which clemency decisions are made when issuance of a writ would not actually or impliedly invalidate a sentence.” Valle v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr., 654 F. 3d 1266, 1267 (11th Cir. 2011); see also Davis v. Scott, No. 8:14-CV-01676-T-27TB, 2014
WL 3407473, at *2 (M.D. Fla. July 10, 2014). Mr. Dailey is challenging the constitutionality of Florida’s clemency proceedings; this claim is not cognizable in a habeas proceeding under § 2254.
Accordingly, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Dkt. 2, is dismissed. As this claim was improperly filed under § 2254, Petitioner cannot establish the requirements for a certificate of appealability and the Court declines to issue one. The Clerk is directed to close the case. DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, on December 5, 2019.
/s/ William F. Jung
WILLIAM F. JUNG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
COPIES FURNISHED TO: Counsel of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Valle v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen., State of Fla., 654 F.3d 1266 (11th Cir. 2011)