From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnett v. Marshall

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 21, 2007
No. CIV S-07-0450 WBS EFB P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-0450 WBS EFB P.

March 21, 2007


ORDER


Petitioner is a state prisoner without counsel challenging the judgment of a state court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, petitioner commenced this action in the wrong district.

Petitioner was convicted in the Riverside County Superior Court, but is confined in San Luis Obispo, both of which are located in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The United States District Court in the district where petitioner was convicted and where he is confined has jurisdiction over this action. See Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 499-500 (1973). Witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner's application are more readily available in the county of conviction. Id. at 499 n. 15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Petitioner should have filed his petition in the district in which he was convicted.

Therefore, the court takes no action on petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis, and transfers this action to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Eastern Division. 28 U.S.C. §§ 84(c)(1); 1404(a).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that this action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Eastern Division.


Summaries of

Barnett v. Marshall

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 21, 2007
No. CIV S-07-0450 WBS EFB P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2007)
Case details for

Barnett v. Marshall

Case Details

Full title:DEXTER BARNETT, Petitioner, v. JOHN MARSHALL, Warden, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Mar 21, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-07-0450 WBS EFB P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2007)