McGuire v. Jones et al

Filing 3

ORDER DISMISSING CASE Without Prejudice. Signed by Judge Cynthia Bashant on 11/8/17.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 TOMMY R. McGUIRE, Case No.: 17-cv-2260-BAS-BLM Petitioner, 13 14 15 ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE v. JULIE JONES, Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, and PAM BONDI, Florida Attorney General, 16 17 Respondents. 18 19 Petitioner, a Florida state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition for a Writ 20 of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, along with an application to proceed in 21 forma pauperis, challenging his Florida state conviction. (ECF Nos. 1, 2.) Petitioner states 22 that he has already filed a 28 U.S.C. §2254 habeas petition challenging his Florida state 23 conviction in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, which was 24 denied, that he unsuccessfully appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals 25 for the Eleventh Circuit, and thereafter unsuccessfully sought a writ of certiorari in the 26 United States Supreme Court. (ECF No. 1-8.) This action is subject to dismissal without 27 prejudice because the Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the Petition. 28 Because Petitioner is not confined within the jurisdiction of the Southern District of 1 17-cv-2260 1 California and was not convicted by any court located in the Southern District of California, 2 this Court lacks jurisdiction over his 28 U.S.C. §2254 habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 3 2241(a) (“Writs of habeas corpus may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice 4 thereof, the district courts and any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions.” 5 (emphasis added)); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497- 6 500 (1973) (recognizing that §2241(a) requires a state prisoner to be in custody within, or 7 either convicted or subject to a detainer within, the jurisdictional boundaries of the Federal 8 District in which he seeks §2254 relief). 9 CONCLUSION AND ORDER 10 Based on the foregoing, the Court DISMISSES this action with prejudice for lack 11 of jurisdiction. The Court TERMINATES AS MOOT Petitioner’s motion to proceed in 12 forma pauperis. (ECF No. 2.) 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 DATED: November 8, 2017 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 17-cv-2260

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?