Cooks v. Sisto et al

Filing 4

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Eastern District of California. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 10/22/08. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/27/2008)

Download PDF
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 27 28 HARRY COOKS, Petitioner, vs. D.K.SISTO, Warden, et al., Respondents. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA *E-FILED - 10/27/08* ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 08-4106 RMW (PR) ORDER OF TRANSFER Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se incarcerated at California State Prison, Solano, seeks a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 challenging the denial of parole by the California Board of Parole Hearings ("Board"). Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the district of conviction, 28 U.S.C. 2241(d). However, petitions challenging the manner in which a sentence is being executed, e.g., if it involves claims challenging the denial of parole, the district of confinement is the preferable forum. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(a)(2); Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989) (district of confinement best forum to review execution of sentence). California State Prison - Solano, where petitioner is confined, lies within the venue of the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. 84. Accordingly, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. 1404(- Order of Transfer P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.08\Cooks106trans.wpd 1 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 27 28 a); Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(2). The clerk shall terminate any pending motions and transfer the entire file to the Eastern District of California. IT IS SO ORDERED. 10/22/08 DATED: _______________ RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge Order of Transfer P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.08\Cooks106trans.wpd 2

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?