Murphy

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: July 18, 2024
• Docket: 5:24-cv-04281
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LADARIUS D. MURPHY, 11 Case No. 24-cv-04281 EJD (PR) Petitioner, 12 ORDER OF TRANSFER v.

14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY COURT, 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 Sacramento 20 County. Dkt. No. 1 at 1. 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 Pelican Bay State Prison in Del Norte County, but 27 his conviction was out of Sacramento County. Dkt. 1 at 2. Sacramento County lies within 1 preferred venue is that district as the district of conviction, and not this one. See 28 U.S.C. 2 || § 1391(b). Accordingly, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court 3 || for the 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. 6 IT ISSO ORDERED. 7 || Dated: July 18, 2024 E ARD J. DAVIL 8 United States District Judge 9 10 1] a 12

2B «14

15 16

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