Opinion
Civil No. 3:CV-05-0060.
January 21, 2005
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Jose Villoch, an inmate at the State Correctional Institution at Huntingdon, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on January 10, 2005.
A 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition may be brought in the federal judicial district in which the state court of the conviction is located and, when the prisoner is confined in a prison located in another federal district in the same state as the state of conviction, the petition may be brought in the district of confinement. The district court for the district in which the petition is filed may transfer the petition to the district court for the district of the conviction when to do so is in the interests of justice. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).
Petitioner is challenging a July, 2001, murder conviction in the Berks County Court of Common Pleas for which he received a life sentence without parole.
The petitioner is a prisoner at the State Correctional Institution at Huntingdon, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, which is in this district. He is challenging a murder conviction in Berks County, Pennsylvania, which is in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. All records of conviction, transcripts of proceedings, witnesses, and counsel, both prosecution and defense, are located within the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
It will be in the interests of justice to transfer this petition to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Petitioner claims, in part, that his trial counsel in Berks County was ineffective. All of the records, transcripts, and involved counsel are located in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Based on the foregoing, it is respectfully recommended that this case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned has entered the foregoing Report and Recommendation dated January 21, 2005.Any party may obtain a review of the Report and Recommendation pursuant to Rule 72.3, which provides:
Any party may object to a magistrate judge's proposed findings, recommendations or report addressing a motion or matter described in 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) or making a recommendation for the disposition of a prisoner case or a habeas corpus petition within ten (10) days after being served with a copy thereof. Such party shall file with the clerk of court, and serve on the magistrate judge and all parties, written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings, recommendations or report to which objection is made and the basis for such objections. The briefing requirements set forth in Local Rule 72.2 shall apply. A judge shall make a Defendant novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. The judge, however, need conduct a new hearing only in his or her discretion or where required by law, and may consider the record developed before the magistrate judge, making his or her own determination on the basis of that record. The judge may also receive further evidence, recall witnesses or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.