Curtis T. Vickers v. FCI Talladega Warden

• Court: District Court, N.D. Alabama
• Decided: February 4, 2026
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00472
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION

CURTIS T. VICKERS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 1:25-cv-00472-RDP-NAD ) FCI TALLADEGA WARDEN, ) ) Respondent. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On January 14, 2026, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation, recommending that this court dismiss this petition for habeas corpus relief without prejudice because the court lacks jurisdiction over Petitioner Curtis T. Vickers’ claims. (Doc. # 14). The Magistrate Judge advised the parties of their right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation within fourteen days (Doc. # 14 at 8-9), and on February 2, 2026, the court received Petitioner’s timely filed objections (Doc. # 15). Petitioner objects to the Report and Recommendation on a multitude of redundant grounds. (Doc. # 15). In his first three objections, Petitioner asserts that the court lacks “judicial power over the custodian;” that he challenges “the existence of constitutional power to enter judgment;” and that the sentencing court was not “constitutionally competent.” (Doc. # 15 at 1-2). Petitioner’s remaining grounds are restatements of the foregoing, each challenging the Article III judicial power of either this court to adjudicate his claims or the sentencing court to impose judgment. (Doc. # 15 at 2-4). These objections do not address the crux of the Report and Recommendation, namely that Petitioner challenges the validity of his conviction and not the execution of his sentence. (Doc. # 14 at 6). Petitioner’s reframing of his challenge to whether the sentencing court had the constitutional authority to sentence him is still a challenge to the validity of his conviction and sentence. Because Petitioner challenges the validity of his conviction, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider his claims in a § 2241 petition. See McCarthen v. Dir. of Goodwill Indus.-Suncoast, Inc., 851 F.3d 1076, 1086-87 (11th Cir. 2017); Amodeo v. FCC Coleman-Low Warden, 984 F.3d 992, 993 (11th Cir. 2021) (holding that “a federal prisoner who seeks to collaterally attack his conviction or sentence must file a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate instead of a § 2241 habeas corpus petition.”’). Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the Report and Recommendation, and Petitioner’s objections, the court OVERRULES the objections, ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s findings and ACCEPTS the recommendation. Accordingly this petition for writ of habeas corpus is due to be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. A separate Final Judgment will be entered. DONE and ORDERED this February 4, 2026.

SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE