Jordan v. Grounds
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 1/30/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2013)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RANDY GROUNDS, Warden,
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
ORDER OF TRANSFER
No. C 12-06286 YGR (PR)
Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He has
filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis as well as various other motions.
Federal statute allows "the Supreme Court, any justice thereof, the district courts and any
circuit judge" to grant writs of habeas corpus "within their respective jurisdictions." 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241(a). A federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus made by a person in custody under the
judgment and sentence of a state court is properly filed in either the district of confinement or the
district of conviction. Id. § 2241(d). Where a case is filed in the wrong venue, the district court has
the discretion to transfer it to the proper federal court "in the interest of justice." See 28 U.S.C.
Here, Petitioner challenges a conviction and sentence incurred in the Solano County Superior
Court, which is in the venue of the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84. Accordingly,
that is the proper venue for this action.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) and Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b), and in the interest of justice, the
Clerk of the Court is ordered to TRANSFER this action forthwith to the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California. All remaining motions are TERMINATED on this Court's
docket as no longer pending in this district.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 30, 2013
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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?