John Henry Yablonsky v. S Fraeuheim
Filing
3
ORDER, CASE TRANSFERRED to Central District of California, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 9/8/2014. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C) [Transferred from California Eastern on 9/9/2014.]
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JOHN HENRY YABLONSKY,
12
13
14
15
1:14-cv-01381-MJS (HC)
Petitioner,
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA
v.
S. FRAEUHEIM, Warden,
Respondent.
16
17
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus action
18
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis
19
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915.
20
The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on
21
diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in A(1) a judicial district where any defendant
22
resides, if all defendants reside in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a
23
substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a
24
substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a
25
judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the
26
action may otherwise be brought.@ 28 U.S.C. ' 1391(b).
27
Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the
28
district of conviction. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). The district court for the district wherein such
1
1
an application is filed in the exercise of its discretion and in furtherance of justice may
2
transfer the application to the other district court for hearing and determination. Id.
3
It is preferable for petitions challenging a conviction or sentence to be heard in the
4
district of conviction while petitions challenging the manner in which the sentence is
5
being executed be heard in the district of confinement. Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244,
6
249 (9th Cir. 1989). In this case, it appears that Petitioner is challenging a conviction
7
from San Bernardino County, which is in the Central District of California. See 28 U.S.C.
8
§ 84. Therefore, the petition should have been filed in the United States District Court for
9
the Central District of California. In the interest of justice, the petition will be transferred
10
to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 28 U.S.C. §§
11
1404(a) and 2241(d).
12
13
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the
United States District Court for the Central District of California.
14
15
16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
September 8, 2014
/s/
17
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?