Walker v. Allenby et al

Filing 7

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 2/4/15. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2015)[Transferred from cand on 2/5/2015.]

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ROGER LEE WALKER,

Case No. 14-cv-05487-YGR (PR)

Plaintiff,
8

ORDER OF TRANSFER
v.

9
10

CLIFF ALLENBY, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, is a civil detainee at the Coalinga State Hospital

13

(“Coalinga”), in Coalinga, California. He is detained pursuant to California’s Sexually Violent

14

Predator Act (“SVPA”).

15

On December 16, 2014, he filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, complaining about

16

the conditions of his confinement at Coalinga. He also filed a motion for leave to proceed in

17

forma pauperis.

18

Here, Defendants are officials of Coalinga and of the California Department of Corrections

19

and Rehabilitation in Sacramento, California. Both Coalinga and Sacramento lie within the venue

20

of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Venue for this case is

21

therefore proper in the Eastern District. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

22

Petitioner also complains about the validity of his assessment as a sexually violent predator

23

under the SVPA, which assessment took place in Alameda County. Challenges to the assessment

24

itself are the province of a habeas petition, not a civil rights action, because they implicate the

25

validity of his detention. See Hill v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 573, 579 (2006) (challenges to the

26

lawfulness of confinement or to particulars affecting its duration are the province of habeas

27

corpus); Nelson v. Sandritter, 351 F.2d 284, 285 (9th Cir. 1965) (constitutionality of state civil

28

commitment proceedings are challenged in federal habeas corpus once state remedies have been

1

exhausted). Plaintiff may challenge the validity of his assessment in this Court, but he must do so

2

by way of a habeas petition filed in a separate action from the instant civil rights case, after

3

exhausting state judicial remedies.

4

Accordingly, and in the interests of justice, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United

5

States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. 1404(a), 1406(a). The

6

Clerk shall transfer the case forthwith.

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

All remaining motions are TERMINATED on this Court’s docket as no longer pending in
this district.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 4, 2015
______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
United States District Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2