Ferra Jimenez v. Warden, Florida Soft Side South Detention Center et al (Collier)
| Daniel Ferra Jimenez |
| Warden, Florida Soft Side South Detention Center and US Attorney General |
| 2:2026cv01379 |
| April 27, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Sheri Polster Chappell |
| Nicholas P Mizell |
| Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 15, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
JUDGMENT is entered and Daniel Ferra Jimenez's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED. Signed by Deputy Clerk on 5/15/2026. (AM)
|
|
Filing 14
PROOF of service - Attorney General of the United States served on 5/7/2026. (TDC)
|
|
Filing 11
OPINION AND ORDER. Daniel Ferra Jimenez's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #1) is DENIED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate any pending motions and deadlines, enter judgment, and close this case. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 5/13/2026. (SAP)
|
|
Filing 9
ENDORSED ORDER denying Respondent Warden of Florida Soft Side South Detention Center's Motion to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #8). "The federal habeas statute straightforwardly provides that the proper respondent to a habeas petition is the person who has custody over the petitioner." Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 434 (2004) (cleaned up). While courts have recognized that immigration detainees in state-run facilities can bring habeas claims against certain federal officials, see, e.g., Masingene v. Martin, 424 F. Supp. 3d 1298, 1301 (S.D. Fla. 2020), the immediate custodian is also a proper respondent. As the immediate custodian of the petitioner, the Warden is a proper respondent to his habeas petition. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 5/7/2026. (SAP)
|
|
Filing 8
MOTION to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Warden, Florida Soft Side South Detention Center. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Meros, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE of Appearance by Emma Genevieve Refuveille on behalf of Warden, Florida Soft Side South Detention Center (Refuveille, Emma)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE of Appearance by Nicholas John Peter Meros on behalf of Warden, Florida Soft Side South Detention Center (Meros, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 5
RESPONSE to #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by US Attorney General. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Keefe, Sean)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER to respond and show cause why the petition should not be granted. The Clerk is directed to serve the petition. The Petitioner has 3 days to reply to the response to petition. Response to petition due by 5/6/2026. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 4/29/2026. (TDC)
|
|
Filing 3
ENDORSED ORDER granting #2 Petitioner's application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs. The court has reviewed the application submitted by Petitioner under 28 U.S.C. 1915 and finds Petitioner qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis. Petitioner may proceed without paying the filing fee. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nicholas P. Mizell on 4/29/2026. (TLP)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Daniel Ferra Jimenez. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(ABM) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Nicholas P. Mizell.
|
|
Filing 1
PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus - Federal filed by Daniel Ferra Jimenez. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(ABM)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
