Howard v. Babcock, et al.

Filing 3

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/2/2011 ORDERING that this matter is TRANSFERRED to the USDC for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division. CASE CLOSED. (Yin, K) [Transferred from caed on 12/6/2011.]

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

JEREMY HOWARD,
Petitioner,

11
vs.

12
13

MICHAEL BABCOCK, Warden, et al.,
Respondents.

14

ORDER
/

15

Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an initial pleading styled

16
17

No. 2:11-cv-3091 DAD (HC)

as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
The habeas petition before this court attacks a judgment of conviction issued by

18
19

the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. As a general rule, a challenge

20

to a federal criminal conviction must be filed as a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a

21

sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and brought in the court where the conviction was

22

suffered. See Hernandez v. Campbell, 204 F.3d 861, 864 (9th Cir. 2000). With exceptions not

23

applicable here, petitions brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 are generally available only to

24

“challenge the manner, location, or conditions of” the execution of a federal prison sentence. Id.

25

The instant action is therefore construed as a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence

26

/////
1

1

imposed by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. As such, it should

2

have been filed in that court.
Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this

3
4

matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa

5

Division.

6

DATED: December 2, 2011.

7
8
9
10
11

DAD:mp

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2