ALFORD v. FCI MARIANNA FLORIDA et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION
MICHAEL ALFORD,
Petitioner,
v. Case No. 5:26-cv-47-AW-MAL
FCI MARIANNA FL, et al.,
Respondents.
_______________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner Michael Alford is serving a federal sentence. He filed a § 2241
petition saying he “challenge[s] the unconstitutional First Amendment retaliatory
transfer for merely exercising [his] First Amend (sic) protected speech.” ECF No. 2
at 2. He is incarcerated in New Jersey, see id. at 1, and, as the magistrate judge notes
in her report and recommendation, the proper place for a § 2241 petition is the
district of confinement. That is not this district.
In the report and recommendation, the magistrate judge recommends
dismissal rather than transfer, noting that the petition includes mixed claims and
appears to raise conditions-of-confinement claims. ECF No. 5. Alford has filed
objections. ECF No. 8. He does not challenge the conclusion that he filed the petition
in the wrong district. But he insists transfer, not dismissal, is appropriate. He
disclaims any conditions-of-confinement claim.
Case 5:26-cv-00047-AW-MAL Document 9 Filed 04/13/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Having carefully considered the matter, and after a de novo review of the
issues raised in Alford’s objections, I now adopt the report and recommendation and
incorporate it into this order. As a matter of discretion, I conclude (as did the
magistrate judge) that based on problems with Alford’s mixed (or at least
ambiguous) claims, dismissal is the better course. This is without prejudice to a new
case filed in the appropriate district.
The clerk will enter a judgment that says, “The § 2241 petition is dismissed
without prejudice.” The clerk will then close the file.
SO ORDERED on April 13, 2026.
s/ Allen Winsor
Chief United States District Judge
Case 5:26-cv-00047-AW-MAL Document 9 Filed 04/13/26 Page 2 of 2