Alonzo McKinney v. J. Walker

C.D. California

Alonzo McKinney v. J. Walker

DecidedOctober 7, 2025

Docket2:25-cv-09637

StatusUnknown

This text of Alonzo McKinney v. J. Walker (Alonzo McKinney v. J. Walker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alonzo McKinney v. J. Walker, (C.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALONZO MCKINNEY, No. 2:25-cv-2842 CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 J. WALKER, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is presently incarcerated at R.J. Donavan 19 Correctional Facility in San Diego County. He is serving a sentence for a conviction from the 20 Los Angeles County Superior Court. The general rule regarding habeas applications is that both 21 the United States District Court in the district where petitioner was convicted and the District 22 Court where petitioner is incarcerated have jurisdiction over the claims. See Braden v. 30th 23 Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973). Because any witnesses and evidence necessary for 24 the resolution of petitioner’s application are more readily available in Los Angeles County, id. at 25 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d), this action will be transferred to the United States District Court 26 for the Central District of California. 27 ///// 28 ///// ] Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is 2 || transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 3 | Dated: October 6, 2025 Card ft 4 by ae 4 CAROLYNK. DELANEY SOS 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 | inuy 9 mcki2842.108a 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALONZO MCKINNEY, No. 2:25-cv-2842 CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 J. WALKER, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is presently incarcerated at R.J. Donavan 19 Correctional Facility in San Diego County. He is serving a sentence for a conviction from the 20 Los Angeles County Superior Court. The general rule regarding habeas applications is that both 21 the United States District Court in the district where petitioner was convicted and the District 22 Court where petitioner is incarcerated have jurisdiction over the claims. See Braden v. 30th 23 Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973). Because any witnesses and evidence necessary for 24 the resolution of petitioner’s application are more readily available in Los Angeles County, id. at 25 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d), this action will be transferred to the United States District Court 26 for the Central District of California. 27 ///// 28 ///// ] Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is 2 || transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 3 | Dated: October 6, 2025 Card ft 4 by ae 4 CAROLYNK. DELANEY SOS 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 | inuy 9 mcki2842.108a 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Alonzo McKinney v. J. Walker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alonzo-mckinney-v-j-walker-cacd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack