Giffen v. Warden Federal Medical Center Rochester

Background

Todd Giffen, identified as a civil detainee at Federal Medical Center Rochester, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A habeas petition is a request for court relief concerning the legality of a person’s custody or confinement. Giffen’s petition claimed that the conditions of his confinement were too restrictive and sought a transfer to another facility. The opinion states that he did not challenge the legality of his confinement.

United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a report and recommendation dated January 10, 2025, recommending that the petition be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Giffen timely objected to that recommendation. He argued that he was entitled to be housed in a facility less restrictive than Federal Medical Center Rochester.

Court’s Analysis

The court reviewed de novo the portions of the recommendation to which Giffen specifically objected. De novo review means the court considered those issues anew. The court agreed with the recommendation’s conclusion that a litigant cannot challenge conditions of confinement through a habeas petition. The court cited Spencer v. Haynes and Krueger v. Erickson.

Because Giffen’s petition challenged the conditions of confinement and sought a transfer, rather than challenging the legality of his confinement, the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the petition in this proceeding.

Disposition

Judge David S. Doty overruled Giffen’s objections and ordered the following:

- The report and recommendation was adopted in its entirety. - The habeas petition was dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. - The motion to waive or strike filing fees was denied. - The motion to appoint counsel was denied. - The motion for immediate release was denied.

The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.