Smith v. Hernandez
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court transfer this matter to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court serve a copy of this Order upon Petitioner and upon the California Attorney General. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 08/06/07. (joeh)
Smith v. Hernandez
Page 1 of 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se has filed a "Petition for Coram Vobis,"
1 18 which this Court construes as a petition for habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ERROL SMITH, Petitioner, vs. ROBERT J. HERNANDEZ, Warden, Respondent.
07-1401 BEN (WMc)
ORDER TRANSFERRING ACTION TO UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION
19 Upon reviewing the petition, the Court finds that this case should be transferred in the interest 20 of justice. 21 A petition for writ of habeas corpus may be filed in the United States District Court of 22 either the judicial district in which the petitioner is presently confined or the judicial district in 23 which he was convicted and sentenced. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d); Braden v. 30th Judicial 24 Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973). The application in the present matter attacks a 25 judgment of conviction that was entered in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, which is 26 within the jurisdictional boundaries of the United States District Court for the Central District 27 28
See Maleng v. Cook, 490 U.S. 488, 493 (1989) (stating that pro se petitions must be construed
Page 2 of 2
1 of California, Western Division. 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(2). Petitioner is presently confined at R. J. 2 Donovan Correctional Facility, located in San Diego County, which is within the jurisdictional 3 boundaries of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. 28 U.S.C. 4 § 84(d). Thus, jurisdiction exists in both the Central and Southern Districts. 5 When a habeas petitioner is challenging a judgment of conviction, the district court of the
6 district in which the judgment of conviction was entered is a more convenient forum because of 7 the accessibility of evidence, records and witnesses. Thus, it is generally the practice of the 8 district courts in California to transfer habeas actions questioning judgments of conviction to the 9 district in which the judgment was entered. Any and all records, witnesses and evidence 10 necessary for the resolution of Petitioner's contentions are available in Los Angeles County. See 11 Braden, 410 U.S. at 497, 499 n.15 (stating that a court can, of course, transfer habeas cases to 12 the district of conviction which is ordinarily a more convenient forum); Laue v. Nelson, 279 13 F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). 14 Therefore, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court
15 transfer this matter to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, 16 Western Division. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of 17 this Court serve a copy of this Order upon Petitioner and upon the California Attorney General. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -207cv1401
DATED: August 6, 2007 Hon. Roger T. Benitez United States District 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?