Thompson v. Dickinson

Filing 2

ORDER OF TRANSFER. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 8/30/11. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/30/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

KEITH A. THOMPSON,
Petitioner,

9
10

vs.

11

K. DICKINSON, Warden,

12

Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 11-3793 JSW (PR)
ORDER OF TRANSFER

13
14

Petitioner is a state prisoner currently incarcerated at the California Medical

15

Facility in Vacaville. He has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28

16

U.S.C. § 2254 arguing that the California Board of Parole Hearings has violated his

17

constitutional rights by denying him parole. He is in custody based upon a conviction

18

obtained in Monterey County Superior Court in 1991. Monterey County is located

19

within the venue of this court, but Vacaville, where Petitioner is incarcerated, is located

20

within the venue of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

21

See 28 U.S.C. § 84.

22

A petition for a writ of habeas corpus made by a person in custody under the

23

judgment and sentence of a state court of a state which contains two or more federal

24

judicial districts may be filed in either the district of confinement or the district of

25

conviction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Each of such districts shall have concurrent

26

jurisdiction to entertain the petition; however, the district court for the district where the

27

petition is filed may transfer the petition to the other district in the furtherance of justice.

28

See id. However, if the petition is directed to the manner in which a sentence is being
executed, e.g., if it involves parole or time credits claims, the district of confinement is

1

the preferable forum. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(a); Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249

2

(9th Cir. 1989).

3

Petitioner challenges the denial of parole in this case, and thus it is directed to the

4

manner in which his sentence is being executed, not to the validity of his conviction.

5

Consequently, the preferable venue for this case is the district of confinement, in this

6

case the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See Habeas

7

L.R. 2254-3(a); Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989).

8

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED in the interest of justice, and pursuant to 28

9

U.S.C. § 1406(a), that this action be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court

10

for the Eastern District of California.

11

The Clerk of the Court shall transfer this matter forthwith.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

DATED:August 30, 2011
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5
6

KEITH A. THOMPSON,
Plaintiff,

7
8
9
10

Case Number: CV11-03793 JSW
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

v.
K. DICKINSON et al,
Defendant.

/

11
12
13
14
15

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on August 30, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Keith A. Thompson
California Medical Facility
E98106
P.O. Box 2000
Vacaville, CA 95696
Dated: August 30, 2011
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk