Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01331/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01331-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ELMER DUARTE,

Petitioner,

v.

SCOTT FRAUENHEM, Warden,

Respondent.

No. 2:14-cv-1868 GGH

ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In his application, petitioner challenges a disciplinary 

conviction issued by Folsom State Prison, located in the Sacramento Division of the Eastern 

District of California. He is confined at Pleasant Valley State Prison in Fresno County which lies 

within the jurisdiction of the Fresno division of this court. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d), a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254 may be filed in the United States District Court of the judicial district in which the 

petitioner is presently confined or the judicial district in which he was convicted and sentenced. 

Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973). Petitioner is confined in the 

Fresno Division of the Eastern District, but was convicted in the Sacramento Division of the 

Eastern District. Jurisdiction over this petition thus exists in both the Sacramento and Fresno 

divisions. It is generally the practice of the district courts in California to transfer habeas actions 

challenging prison administrative hearings to the district in which the petitioner is confined. All 

Case 1:14-cv-01331-AWI-MJS Document 3 Filed 08/26/14 Page 1 of 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

2

records, witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner’s claims are more 

readily available in that district. See Braden, 410 U.S. at 497, 499 n. 15; Laue v. Nelson, 279 

F.Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). In this case, that district is the Fresno Division of the Eastern 

District of California. 

Accordingly, in the interest of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 

California sitting in Fresno; and

2. All future filings shall reference the new Fresno case number assigned and shall be 

filed at:

United States District Court

Eastern District of California

1130 “O” Street

Fresno, CA 93721

Dated: August 26, 2014

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:076/Duar1868.ven

Case 1:14-cv-01331-AWI-MJS Document 3 Filed 08/26/14 Page 2 of 2