Anthony E. Mack v. David Baughman

Filing 10

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/13/2016 VACATING the 8/16/2016 findings and recommendations 6 ; and this matter is TRANSFERRED to the USDC for the Central District of California. CASE CLOSED. (Yin, K)[Transferred from California Eastern on 9/15/2016.]

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTHONY E. MACK, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:16-cv-1300 MCE KJN P Petitioner, v. ORDER DAVID BAUGHMAN, Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On August 16, 2016, the undersigned filed findings and recommendations and 21 recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice based on petitioner’s failure to pay 22 the filing fee, and denied petitioner’s request for change of venue because it appeared petitioner 23 was challenging a policy under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 rather than the fact or duration of his 24 confinement under 28 U.S.C. 2254. 25 On August 25, 2016, petitioner paid the filing fee. On September 8, 2016, after receiving 26 an extension of time, petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations. In his 27 objections, petitioner confirms that he was falsely imprisoned in Los Angeles County at the time 28 of the allegations set forth in his pleading, and contends that he challenges the fact and duration 1 1 of such confinement in Los Angeles County rather than the conditions of his confinement under 2 42 U.S.C. § 1983. While both this court and the United States District Court in the district where 3 petitioner was convicted or re-sentenced have jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit 4 Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), any and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of 5 petitioner’s application are more readily available in Los Angeles County. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 6 U.S.C. § 2241(d). 7 8 Thus, the findings and recommendations are vacated, and this action is transferred to the Central District of California. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 10 11 12 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 16, 2016 (ECF No. 6), are vacated; and 2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of 13 California. 14 Dated: September 13, 2016 15 16 17 /mack1300.108 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?