BRADLEY v. STATE OF FLORIDA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE DIVISION
ADRIANNA NOELLE BRADLEY,
Petitioner,
v. 	Case No. 1:26cv044-MW/MAF
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
__________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TO TRANSFER HABEAS CORPUS PETITION
On February 	12, 2026, 	Adrianna Noelle Bradley, 	a state inmate
proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254. 	ECF No. 1. 	She has not yet paid the filing fee or filed a
motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 	See id. 	In the § 2254 petition, she
indicates she challenges a judgment and sentence imposed in 2018 by the
Tenth Judicial Circuit, Polk County, following a jury trial in case number 53-
2015-007449-A000-XX. ECF No. 1 at 1-2.
Petitioner Bradley is currently incarcerated at the Lowell Correctional
Institution Annex in Marion County, Florida, which is located in the Middle
District of Florida. 	See 28 U.S.C. § 89(b). 	She challenges a state court
judgment from the Tenth Judicial Circuit, Polk County, Florida, which is also
Case 1:26-cv-00044-MW-MAF Document 3 Filed 02/20/26 Page 1 of 3

Page 2 of 3
Case No. 1:26cv044-MW/MAF
located in the Middle District of Florida. 	ECF No. 1 at 1; see 28 U.S.C.
§ 89(b).
For federal habeas corpus actions, jurisdiction is appropriate in the
district of confinement and the district of conviction. 	28 U.S.C. § 2241(d)
(providing that state prisoner may file habeas petition in district of conviction
or in district of incarceration). Petitioner Bradley is not confined in this district
and does not challenge the judgment of a state court located in this district;
thus, 	jurisdiction 	is 	not 	appropriate 	in the Northern District 	of 	Florida.
Therefore, this petition should be transferred to the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida, the district of Petitioner Bradley’s
confinement and conviction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (“For the convenience
of the parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may
transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have
been 	brought 	or 	to 	any 	district 	or 	division 	to 	which 	all 	parties 	have
consented.”); see also, e.g., Mitchell v. Henderson, 432 F.2d 435, 436 (5th
Cir. 1970) (“Under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241(d), state convicts may file federal
habeas corpus petitions in the district either where they are confined or
where they were convicted. 	The purpose of this, of course, is to provide a
more convenient forum for witnesses.”).
Case 1:26-cv-00044-MW-MAF Document 3 Filed 02/20/26 Page 2 of 3

Page 3 of 3
Case No. 1:26cv044-MW/MAF
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully RECOMMENDED that the case file, including any
service copies and pending motions, be TRANSFERRED to the United
States 	District 	Court 	for 	the 	Middle 	District 	of 	Florida, 	for 	all 	further
proceedings.
IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on February 20, 2026.
S/ Martin A. Fitzpatrick
MARTIN A. FITZPATRICK
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this
Report and Recommendation, a party may serve and file specific
written objections to these proposed findings and recommendations.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the objections shall be served upon
all other parties. 	A party may respond to another party’s objections
within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. 	Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). 	Any different deadline that may appear on the
electronic docket is for the Court’s internal use only and does not
control. 	If a party fails to object to the magistrate judge’s findings or
recommendations as to any particular claim or issue contained in a
Report and Recommendation, that party waives the right to challenge
on appeal the district court’s order based on the unobjected-to factual
and legal conclusions. 	See 11th Cir. R. 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.
Case 1:26-cv-00044-MW-MAF Document 3 Filed 02/20/26 Page 3 of 3