McNeely v. McGinness

Filing 9

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/12/09 ORDERING that this court has not ruled on petitioner's 2 request to proceed ifp; this matter is TRANSFERRED to the Northern District of California. Original file, certified copy of transfer order, and docket sheet sent. CASE CLOSED. (Yin, K)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. JOHN MCGINNESS, Respondent. / Petitioner, currently confined at Napa State Hospital, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. This court will not rule on petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis. Shortly after filing his petition, petitioner was transferred from the Sacramento County Main Jail to Napa State Hospital. Petitioner remains confined at Napa State Hospital, which is located in Napa County. Jurisdiction over this § 2241 petition is proper in the district in which petitioner's immediate custodian is located. See Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989) ("The proper forum to challenge the execution of a sentence is the district where the prisoner is confined."). Petitioner's custodian is located in the Northern District of California. Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631 in the interests of justice this action will be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 1 ORDER DOCK MCNEELY, Petitioner, No. CIV S-09-0196 DAD P IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
DAD:9 mcne0196.108

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. This court has not ruled on petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis; 2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. DATED: March 12, 2009.

2