Following review of the petition and the response thereto, it is ordered that said petition is hereby dismissed as improper. See Henry v. Santana, 62 So. 3d 1122, 1126 n.3 (Fla. 2011) (“The purpose of a habeas corpus proceeding is to inquire into the legality of the petitioners present detention.” (quoting Sneed v. Mayo, 69 So. 2d 653, 654 (Fla. 1954))); Patterson v. Christensen, 133 Fla. 816, 183 So. 18, 19 (1938) (“Habeas corpus is not the proper proceeding in which to challenge venue ․”); King v. State, 695 So. 2d 1299, 1299 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (“[C]laims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel are not cognizable in a petition for habeas corpus ․”).
PER CURIAM.