Milorad Olic v. HDSP

Filing 7

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/21/2016 ORDERING this court has not ruled on petitioner's application to proceed ifp; and this matter is TRANSFERRED to the USDC for the Central District of California. CASE CLOSED. (Yin, K) [Transferred from California Eastern on 12/22/2016.]

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MILORAD OLIC, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:16-cv-2845 JAM AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER HDSP WARDEN, 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, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. This 19 court will not rule on petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis. 20 21 22 Petitioner is presently incarcerated at California State Prison in Lancaster. He is serving a sentence for a conviction rendered by the Orange County Superior Court. The general rule with regard to habeas applications is that both the United States District 23 Court in the district where petitioner was convicted and the District Court where petitioner is 24 incarcerated have jurisdiction over the claims. See Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 25 U.S. 484 (1973). In the instant case, both petitioner’s conviction and his place of incarceration 26 occurred in an area covered by the District Court for the Central District of California. 27 Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 28 1. This court has not ruled on petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis; and 1 1 2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of 2 California. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). 3 DATED: December 21, 2016 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 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?