Cedric R. Hutchinson challenges the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. By this petition, Hutchinson challenged his conviction for aggravated battery, a conviction obtained in Hillsborough County. The circuit court in Calhoun County dismissed the petition as "unauthorized." While the premise of Hutchinson's petition was incorrect - that a motor vehicle cannot be a deadly weapon under the aggravated battery statute* - the circuit *1328court should have transferred the petition to Hillsborough County in the Thirteenth Circuit for its consideration of the petition. See Torres v. State , 208 So.3d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) ; Baker v. State , 164 So.3d 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).
In Torres and Baker , the petitioner challenged the sufficiency of the charging document. These cases are therefore distinguishable from the case on which the trial court relied, Gill v. Jones , 204 So.3d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016), which held that a habeas petition was unauthorized and hence subject to dismissal because the petitioner pursued post-conviction relief in the wrong court). See also James v. Jones , 244 So.3d 352 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (holding dismissal of habeas petition appropriate when petitioner is seeking post-conviction relief available under rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure ).
Accordingly, the order of dismissal is vacated, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court with the instruction that the petition be transferred to the circuit court for Hillsborough County.
B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Osterhaus, J., concur.