MAYER v. LANE et al

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by JACK MAYER directing him to show cause on or before May 23, 2017 why his petition should not be transferred to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell on 05/09/2017. (Mitchell, Robert)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JACK MAYER,
Petitioner,
v.
SUPERINTENDENT LANE,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:17-CV-586

MEMORANDUM
Jack Mayer, an inmate at the State Correctional Institution- Fayette, by his
counsel has presented a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. According to the petition,
Mayer was convicted by a jury of dealing in proceeds of unlawful activities, theft by
deception, receiving stolen property, criminal use of communication facility, conspiracy
and corrupt organizations at No. 1427 CR 2014 in the Court of Common Pleas of Chester
County, Pennsylvania and sentenced to a fifteen to thirty year period of incarceration.
This sentence was imposed on November 21, 2014.
It is provided in 28 U.S.C. '2241(d) that:
Where an application for a writ of habeas corpus is made by a person in
custody under the judgment and sentence of a State court of a state which
contains two or more Federal judicial districts, the application may be
filed in the district court for the district wherein such person is in custody
or in the district court for the district within which the State court was held
which convicted and sentenced him and each of such district courts shall
have concurrent jurisdiction to entertain the application. The district court
for the district wherein such an application is filed in the exercise of its
discretion and in furtherance of justice may transfer the application to the
other district court for hearing and determination.
While the petitioner is in custody in the Western District of Pennsylvania, the trial court
which sentenced him is located in Chester County, which is located in the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania. It, therefore, would appear that the interests of justice would best be served by
transferring the petition to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.
An appropriate Order will be entered.

ORDER
AND NOW, this 9th day of May 2017, for the reasons set forth in the foregoing
Memorandum,
IT IS ORDERED that if he objects to the transfer, the petitioner do so on or
before May 23, 2017,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if no objections are filed the case will be
transferred after that date to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania for further proceedings.
s/ Robert C. Mitchell
United States Magistrate Judge

2