Opinion
23-cv-02241 NC (PR)
05-25-2023
RAMON NAVARRO LUPERCIO, Petitioner, v. ANDREW REED FLIER, Respondent.
ORDER OF TRANSFER
NATHANAEL M. COUSINS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Petitioner, a state prisoner at San Quentin State Prison, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See Dkt. No. 1 (“Petition”). Petitioner challenges his state conviction from the Superior Court of Tulare County. Compare id. at 2 (stating his filing “concerns a conviction”), 4, 8 (showing Petitioner intends to challenge his conviction in “CASE-NO-VCF-094656-02”) with id., Exs., passim (showing Petitioner was tried and convicted in Case Number 94656, filed in 2002 in Tulare County). Petitioner originally filed the Petition in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, and that court transferred the instant action to this District. See Pet. at 1.
Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the district of conviction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). However, petitions challenging a conviction or sentence are preferably heard in the district of conviction. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F.Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). Here, because petitioner challenges a conviction from Tulare County, the Eastern District of California is the district of conviction. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b).
Accordingly, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions and transfer the entire file to the Eastern District of California.
IT IS SO ORDERED.