Alonso v. Warden, FCC Coleman - USP I

• Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
• Decided: January 26, 2021
• Docket: 5:21-cv-00045
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION

JAROD MONTRELL ALONSO,

Petitioner,

v. Case No: 5:21-cv-45-Oc-60PRL

WARDEN, FCC COLEMAN – LOW,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Petitioner initiated this civil action by filing a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1). In the Petition, Petitioner alleges he is in receipt of “newly discovered evidence” of prosecutorial misconduct; his trial attorney was ineffective for allowing Petitioner to proceed to trial; and his sentence amounts to a “manifest injustice” (id. at 6). a. Background Petitioner is a federal inmate incarcerated at the Coleman Federal Correctional Complex. In 2015, a jury in the Southern District of Florida found Petitioner guilty of being a felon in knowing possession of a firearm. See United States v. Alonso, 654 F. App’x 995 (11th Cir. 2016). Petitioner sought a direct appeal and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion affirming his conviction and sentence. Id. Thereafter, Petitioner filed with the sentencing court a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and the district court denied Petitioner’s § 2255 motion on June 11, 2018. Alonso v. United States, No. 1:17-cv-20477-BLOOM/White (S.D. Fla. June 11, 2018). Petitioner sought an appeal of the district court’s denial, but the Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution on September 27, 2018. Alonso v. United States, No. 18-13240 (11th Cir. Sept. 27, 2018). On or

about January 15, 2021, Petitioner filed with the Eleventh Circuit an application for leave to file a successive § 2255 petition. In re: Alonso, No. 21-10172 (11th Cir.). As of the date of this Order, the application is still pending before the Eleventh Circuit. b. Analysis Rule 12(h)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[i]f the court determines at any time that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.” See also Rule 12, Rules Governing Section 2255

proceedings. The Eleventh Circuit has held that 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is not available to challenge the validity of a sentence except on very narrow grounds. McCarthan v. Director of Goodwill Industries-Suncoast, Inc., 851 F.3d 1076, 1079 (11th Cir. 2017); Bernard v. FCC Coleman Warden, 686 F. App’x 730 (11th Cir. 2017) (citing McCarthan, 851 F.3d at 1092-93). None of those grounds are present in this case. Further, Petitioner’s application to file a second or successive § 2255 pending before

the Eleventh Circuit is identical to the Petition. See In re: Alonso, No. 21-10172. Thus, this case is due to be dismissed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) and this case are DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, this 26th day of January, 2021.

/ | / ry / ( a mnt = a TOM BARBER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Jax-7 C: Jarod Montrell Alonso, #02445-104