(HC) Ruiz v. On Habeas Corpus

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 JOEY R. RUIZ, 11 Case No. 20-08594 EJD (PR) Petitioner, v. 13

15 Respondent.

17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus 19 under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Dkt. No. 1. Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the 20 district of confinement or the district of conviction, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Federal courts in 21 California traditionally have chosen to hear petitions challenging a conviction or sentence 22 in the district of conviction or sentencing. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1); Dannenberg v. 23 Ingle, 831 F. Supp. 767, 768 (N.D. Cal. 1993); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 24 (N.D. Cal. 1968). According to the petition, Petitioner was convicted in Kings County, 25 Dkt. No. 1 at 1, which lies within the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b). 26 Petitioner is currently confined at Deuel Vocational Institution in San Joaquin County 27 which is also within the Eastern District. Id. Therefore, the venue for this action is in that 1 TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. 2 See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1). 3 The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions and transfer the entire file to the 4 Eastern District of California.

7 EDWARD J. DAVILA United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 (12

2B

15 16

17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Order of Transfer PRO-SE\EJD\HC.20\08594Ruiz_transfer(ED) 26 27