Alegria v. State of California

Filing 6

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 6/2/2017 ORDERING this court has not ruled on 2 application to proceed in forma pauperis and CASE TRANSFERRED to U.S. District Court for the District of Central District of California. (Henshaw, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ALFONSO MUNOZ ALEGRIA,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:17-cv-0802 DB P

Petitioner,
v.

ORDER

STATE OF CLAIFORNIA,
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 Sierra Conservation Center in Tuolumne County.
He is serving a sentence for a conviction rendered by the Riverside 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 U.S.

25

484 (1973). In the instant case, petitioner's conviction occurred in an area covered by the District

26

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: June 2, 2017

4
5
6
7

/DLB7;
DB/Inbox/Routine/aleg0802.108a

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2