Durr v. Ward

United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia

Durr v. Ward

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA STATESBORO DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER ISIAH DURR, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) CV622-002 ) TIMOTHY C. WARD, Warden, ) ) Respondent. )

ORDER

Christopher Isaiah Durr seeks relief from his state conviction and sentence pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254

. See doc. 1. His petition reveals that he is incarcerated at Smith State Prison, in Glennville, Georgia.

Id. at 2

. Glenville lies in Tattnall County, which is in this Court’s Statesboro Division. See

28 U.S.C. § 90

(c)(6). The petition further reveals that he was convicted in Clayton County, Georgia. Doc. 1 at 2. Clayton County lies within the Northern District of Georgia. See

28 U.S.C. § 90

(a)(2). This Court is, therefore, not the proper forum for Durr’s petition.

1 Federal law allows § 2254 petitions to be filed in the district within which the petitioner was convicted or in the district within which he is

confined.

28 U.S.C. § 2241

(d); Wright v. Indiana,

263 F. App’x 794, 795

(11th Cir. 2008). Thus, this Court has jurisdiction over the petition. Nevertheless, it is a longstanding judicial policy and practice to funnel

such petitions into the district within which the state prisoner was convicted, since that will be the most convenient forum. Eagle v. Linahan,

279 F.3d 926

, 933 n. 9 (11th Cir. 2001); see also Mitchell v.

Henderson,

432 F.2d 435

, 436 (5th Cir. 1970); Wright,

263 F. App’x at 795

. That practice also fosters an equitable distribution of habeas cases between the districts. Durr was convicted in Clayton County, see doc. 1

at 2, which lies within the Northern District of Georgia. See

28 U.S.C. § 90

(a)(1). Accordingly, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for all further

proceedings. See

28 U.S.C. § 1404

(a) (permitting a district court to transfer any civil action to another district or division where it may have been brought for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the

2 interest of justice); Rufus v. Kemp,

2013 WL 2659983

at * 1 (S.D. Ga. June 12, 2018). SO ORDERED, this 12th day of January, 2022. bin. Christopher L. Ray United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of Georgia

Reference

Status
Unknown