Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-01469/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-01469-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERRY ALFRED WHITWORTH,

Petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES PAROLE 

COMMISSION, et al.,

Respondents.

Case No. 16-cv-01469-HSG (PR) 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION; DIRECTIONS 

TO CLERK

Re: Dkt. No. 11

On March 24, 2016, Petitioner Jerry Alfred Whitworth, a federal prisoner currently 

incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Atwater, California, filed a document entitled, 

“Combined Petitions For Audita Querela, Mandamus, Prohibition, For Preliminary Injunctive 

Relief In The Nature Of Stay Of Prison Transfers, And For Bail, Or Any Other Extraordinary 

Relief For Which Petitioner May Be Entitled Pursuant To The All Writs Act.” Petitioner’s case 

history shows that he had a federal criminal case, United States v. Whitworth, Case No. CR 85-

0552 JPV, before a former judge of this court, Judge John P. Vukasin. In that case, petitioner was 

convicted of several counts of espionage and tax evasion following a four-month jury trial. See

United States v. Whitworth, 856 F.2d 1268, 1270-71 (9th Cir. 1988). In July 1986, Judge Vukasin 

sentenced petitioner to 365 years in prison, without the possibility of parole for sixty years. See 

id. Petitioner is currently serving his federal sentence.

On August 19, 2016, the undersigned dismissed the instant action noting that petitioner 

may not seek mandamus relief from this Court. As it was not clear from the contents of the 

petition whether petitioner was challenging the legality of his 1986 federal criminal conviction and 

sentence in Case No. CR 85-0552 JPV or challenging the execution of his sentence, the Court 

gave him instructions for both: (1) filing a motion to vacate, set aside or correct his current 

Case 4:16-cv-01469-HSG Document 12 Filed 12/01/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

sentence pursuant to § 2255 in the court which imposed the sentence; and (2) filing a petition 

under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to challenge the execution of his sentence.

On September 16, 2016, petition filed a motion for reconsideration clarifying that he was 

challenging his current conviction and sentence. The appropriate place for petitioner to challenge 

his current conviction and sentence is in the criminal case in which the conviction and sentence 

were imposed, and not in a separate petition. Accordingly, the motion for reconsideration is 

DENIED. The Court notes, however, that petitioner did attempt to first file his petition in his 

criminal case, Case No. CR 85-0552 JPV, and through no fault of petitioner, the Clerk of Court 

opened the petition as a new action.

Accordingly, in the interests of justice, the Clerk shall re-file Docket No. 1 as a Section 

2255 motion in Case No. CR 85-0552 JPV. Because Judge Vukasin is now deceased, the Clerk is 

directed to assign the motion to the general duty judge pursuant to the Court’s Internal Operating 

Procedure No. 4.I. The Clerk shall also file a copy of this order in Case No. CR 85-0552 JPV.

This order terminates Docket No. 11. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

12/1/2016

Case 4:16-cv-01469-HSG Document 12 Filed 12/01/16 Page 2 of 2