Gaines v. Sherman

Filing 2

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the United States District Court for the Central District of California signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/3/2015. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LESLIE JAMES GAINES, JR., 12 13 14 15 1:15-cv-00171-MJS (HC) Petitioner, ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA v. STU SHERMAN, Respondent. 16 17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2241. 19 The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on 20 diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in A(1) a judicial district where any defendant 21 resides, if all defendants reside in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a 22 substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a 23 substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a 24 judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the 25 action may otherwise be brought.@ 28 U.S.C. ' 1391(b). 26 Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the 27 district of conviction. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). The district court for the district wherein such 28 an application is filed in the exercise of its discretion and in furtherance of justice may 1 1 transfer the application to the other district court for hearing and determination. Id. 2 It is preferable for petitions challenging a conviction or sentence to be heard in the 3 district of conviction while petitions challenging the manner in which the sentence is 4 being executed be heard in the district of confinement. Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 5 249 (9th Cir. 1989). In this case, it appears that Petitioner is challenging a conviction 6 from Los Angeles County, which is in the Central District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 7 84. Therefore, the petition should have been filed in the United States District Court for 8 the Central District of California. In the interest of justice, the petition will be transferred 9 to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 28 U.S.C. §§ 10 11 12 1404(a) and 2241(d). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 3, 2015 /s/ 16 Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?