(HC) Howell v. Black

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RONNIE E. HOWELL, Case No. 20-cv-03250-JSC 7 Plaintiff, ORDER OF TRANSFER v. WARDEN, Defendant.

12 Petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 The petition challenges the validity of conviction from Fresno County Superior Court.

15 A petition for a writ of habeas corpus 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 may be filed in either the district of confinement or the district of conviction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).

18 Each of such districts shall have concurrent jurisdiction to entertain the petition; however, the district court for the district where the petition is filed may transfer the petition to the other district in the furtherance of justice. See id. Federal courts in California traditionally have chosen to hear petitions challenging a conviction or sentence in the district of conviction. See Dannenberg v. Ingle, 831 F. Supp. 767, 768 (N.D. Cal. 1993); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968).

24 As Petitioner challenges his conviction, the proper venue for his petition is the district in which he was convicted. Fresno County is located within the venue of the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84.

WAOe 1L.OCU UV VV POI VLEl LMYVUULLIOCEIL or PHM Vai ovVrcy rPayet ¢vic 1 Accordingly, in the interest of justice, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States || District Court for the Eastern District of California. In light of this transfer, ruling on Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is deferred to the Eastern District. The Clerk shall || transfer this matter forthwith.

5 IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 Dated: May 26, 2020 g ne JAGQQUELINE SCOTT CORL 9 United States Magistrate Judge

Z 18