United States District Court, S.D. Florida
REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
WHITE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Hurley, Petitioner, is detained at Metro West Detention
Center. She filed a pro se Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging
the constitutionality of her arrest, the terms of her
pretrial detainment, and expressing a general fear of her
public defender for telling her to remain quiet and
“tell[ing her] what to do. The relevant case number
arises out of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for
Miami-Dade County under case no
17-cf-015849. The state court docket reveals
she is currently at the pre-trial stage.
Cause has been referred to the undersigned for consideration
and report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and
Rules 8(b) and 10 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases
in the United States District Courts. For its consideration
of this Petition, this Court reviewed the petition (DE#1) and
the state court docket arising out of the Eleventh Judicial
Circuit Court in and for Miami-Dade County under No.
raises the following grounds for relief:
1. She was arrested without a warrant.
2. She was not given a pretrial conference.
3. She was denied her rights under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.121 and
4. She has been in pretrial detainment without bond for eight
months without an indictment.
5. Her trial counsel reset the court date.
(DE#1 at 1).
Subject Matter Jurisdiction-Petitioner is not “In
axiomatic that a district court may entertain a habeas corpus
petition only if a petitioner is “in custody in
violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the
United States.” 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c)(3),
2254(a). Thus, federal courts lack subject matter
jurisdiction whenever the “in custody”
requirement is not established. Llovera-Linares v.
Florida, 559 Fed.Appx. 949, 951 (11th Cir. 2014). In
order to be “in custody” under § 2254,
petitioners must be “in custody” ...