UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

DUANE MICHAEL WOOD,

Petitioner,

v. Case No.: 2:25-cv-00496-SPC-KCD

WARDEN, LEE COUNTY JAIL,

Respondent, /

OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Petitioner Duane Michael Wood’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under

. (Doc. 1). Wood is a pretrial detainee in the Lee County jail. He challenges his state criminal charges in the 20th Judicial Circuit Court in and for Lee County, Florida, case numbers 24-CF- 018218 and 24-CF-18219. Wood challenges the evidence presented against him and alludes to a guilty plea, though the state court dockets show he has not pleaded guilty, and the charges remain pending. Wood is not entitled to relief under § 2241 because he does not allege or demonstrate that he has exhausted his claims in state court. Wilkinson v. Dotson,

(2005). Notably, federal habeas relief is not intended as a “pre-trial motion forum for state prisoners.” Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky,

(1973). Further, principles of equity, comity, and federalism require the Court to abstain from interfering in state criminal proceedings. See Younger v.

Harris,

(1971) (stating “absent extraordinary circumstances” federal court should not enjoin state criminal proceedings). Wood provides no reasons for this Court to overlook the abstention principle. Nor does he allege any facts that warrant application any exception to the Younger doctrine. See

Hughes v. Attorney Gen. of Fla.,

, 1263 n.6 (11th Cir. 2004).1 Certificate of Appealability

Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, the “district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.” Because Wood is not entitled to habeas corpus relief, the Court must now consider whether he is entitled to a certificate of appealability. It finds that he is not.

A prisoner seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to appeal a district court’s denial of his petition.

(c)(1). Rather, a district court must first issue a certificate of appealability (“COA”). “A [COA] may issue...only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of

1 Noting the Supreme Court in Younger set three exceptions to the abstention doctrine: “(1) there is evidence of state proceedings motivated by bad faith, (2) irreparable injury would occur, or (3) there is no adequate alternative state forum where the constitutional issues can be raised.”

the denial of a constitutional right.”

(c)(2). To make such a showing, Wood must demonstrate that “reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” Tennard v. Dretke,

(2004) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel,

, 484 (2000)), or that “the issues presented were ‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further,” Miller—El, 537 U.S. at 335-36. Wood has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. Duane Michael Wood’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under

(Doc. □□ □□ DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate all pending motions and deadlines, enter judgment, and close this file. 3. Wood is not entitled to a certificate of appealability. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on June 13, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SA: FTMP-1 Copies: All Parties of Record