Wade v. Foulk

Filing 5

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/25/2014 ORDERING that this court has not ruled on petitioner's application to proceed ifp; and this matter is TRANSFERRED to the USDC for the Northern District of California. CASE CLOSED. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CLENARD CEBRON WADE,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-2060 DAD P

v.

ORDER

FRED FOULK, Warden,

15

Respondent.

16
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas

17
18

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis.
The application attacks a judgment of conviction entered by the Contra Costa County

19
20

Superior Court. While both this court and the United States District Court in the district where

21

petitioner was convicted have jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S.

22

484 (1973), any and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner’s

23

application are more readily available in Contra Costa County. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. §

24

2241(d).

25

/////

26

/////

27

/////

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. This court has not ruled on petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis; and

3

2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of

4

California.

5

Dated: September 25, 2014

6
7
8
9

/md
wade2060.108

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2