Kimble v. People of the State of California

Filing 7

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to Eastern District of California. Signed by Judge Nandor J. Vadas on 6/12/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(njvlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISON 7 8 LARRY CUNNIGHAM KIMBLE, Case No. 17-cv-2581-NJV (PR) Petitioner, 9 v. ORDER OF TRANSFER 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Docket Nos. 2, 6 Respondent. This is a habeas corpus petition filed pro se by a state prisoner. Petitioner challenges a 14 conviction obtained in the San Joaquin County Superior Court. San Joaquin County is in the 15 venue of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Petitioner is also 16 incarcerated in the Eastern District of California. 17 Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the district of 18 conviction, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d); this district is neither. Because petitions challenging a 19 conviction are preferably heard in the district of conviction, Habeas L.R. 2254-3(a); Laue v. 20 Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968), and petitioner was convicted and is incarcerated 21 in the Eastern District, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the 22 Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b). All pending 23 motions are vacated and will be addressed in the Eastern District. 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 12, 2017 ________________________ NANDOR J. VADAS United States Magistrate Judge

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?