Lewis v. Warden

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 KEVIN LEWIS, 11 Case No. 5:23-cv-06274 EJD (PR) Petitioner, v.

15 Respondent.

17 18 Petitioner, a state prison proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas 19 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state conviction out of the Delano, 20 which lies within Kern County. Dkt. No. 1 at 2. 21 Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the 22 district of conviction. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Federal courts in California traditionally have 23 chosen to hear petitions challenging a conviction or sentence in the district of conviction or 24 sentencing. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1); Dannenberg v. Ingle, 31 F.Supp. 767, 768 25 (N.D. Cal. 1993); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F.Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). 26 Petitioner is currently confined at CSP-Sacramento in Sacramento County, and his 27 conviction was out of Kern County. Dkt. 1 at 2. Sacramento County and Kern County 1 Therefore, venue properly lies in that district and not in this one. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 2 Accordingly, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the 3 Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). 4 The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions and transfer the entire file to the 5 Eastern District of California. 7 Dated: January 29, 2024 EDWARD J. DAVILA 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12

2B «14

15 16

Oo Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ty