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)

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