Dotson v. Scribner - Document No. 3
Dotson v. Scribner - Document No. 3
Dotson v. Scribner - Document No. 3
3
Case 3:06-cv-02622-JM-AJB Document 3 Filed 12/11/2006 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 JACARNELL DOTSON , Civil No. 06-CV-02622 JM (AJB)
12 Petitioner, ORDER TRANSFERRING
ACTION TO UNITED STATES
13 vs. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SCRIBNER, Warden, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
14 CALIFORNIA, EASTERN
Respondent. DIVISION
15
16
17 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a habeas corpus action filed
18 pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West Supp. 2005). Petitioner has also filed a motion to
19 proceed in forma pauperis. Upon reviewing the petition, the Court finds that this case
20 should be transferred in the interest of justice. Thus, this Court does not rule on
21 Petitioner’s in forma pauperis status.
22 A petition for writ of habeas corpus may be filed in the United States District Court
23 of either the judicial district in which the petitioner is presently confined or the judicial
24 district in which he was convicted and sentenced. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d); Braden v.
25 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973). Petitioner is presently confined
26 at Calipatria State Prison, located in Imperial County, which is within the jurisdictional
27 boundaries of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. See
28 28 U.S.C. § 84(d). Petitioner’s state court conviction occurred in Victorville Superior
-1- 06cv2662
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 3:06-cv-02622-JM-AJB Document 3 Filed 12/11/2006 Page 2 of 2
1 Court, in San Bernardino County, which is located within the jurisdictional boundaries
2 of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Eastern Division
3 See 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(1). Thus, jurisdiction exists in both the Southern and Central
4 Districts.
5 When a habeas petitioner is challenging a state court conviction, the district court
6 of the district in which the state court conviction took place is a more convenient forum
7 because of the accessibility of evidence, records and witnesses. Thus, it is generally the
8 practice of the district courts in California to transfer habeas actions questioning state
9 court convictions to the district in which the state court conviction took place. Any and
10 all records, witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of Petitioner’s
11 contentions are more readily available in San Bernardino County. See Braden, 410 U.S.
12 at 497, 499 n.15 (stating that a court can, of course, transfer habeas cases to the district
13 of conviction which is ordinarily a more convenient forum). Therefore, in the furtherance
14 of justice,
15 IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court transfer this matter to the United
16 States District Court for the Central District of California, Eastern Division. See 28
17 U.S.C. § 2241(d).
18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court serve a copy of this
19 Order upon Petitioner and upon the California Attorney General.
20 IT IS SO ORDERED.
21 DATED: December 11, 2006
22
23 Hon. Jeffrey T. Miller
United States District Judge
24
25
26
27
28
-2- 06cv2662