Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01401/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01401-0/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

 See Maleng v. Cook, 490 U.S. 488, 493 (1989) (stating that pro se petitions must be construed

liberally).

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\BEN\07cv1401-transfer.wpd, 867 -1- 07cv1401

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERROL SMITH, Civil No. 07-1401 BEN (WMc)

Petitioner,

ORDER TRANSFERRING ACTION

TO UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT FOR THE CENTRAL

DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA,

WESTERN DIVISION

vs.

ROBERT J. HERNANDEZ, Warden,

Respondent.

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se has filed a “Petition for Coram Vobis,”

which this Court construes as a petition for habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1

Upon reviewing the petition, the Court finds that this case should be transferred in the interest

of justice. 

A petition for writ of habeas corpus may be filed in the United States District Court of

either the judicial district in which the petitioner is presently confined or the judicial district in

which he was convicted and sentenced. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d); Braden v. 30th Judicial

Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973). The application in the present matter attacks a

judgment of conviction that was entered in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, which is

within the jurisdictional boundaries of the United States District Court for the Central District

Case 3:07-cv-01401-BEN-WMC Document 2 Filed 08/06/07 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

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\BEN\07cv1401-transfer.wpd, 867 -2- 07cv1401

of California, Western Division. 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(2). Petitioner is presently confined at R. J.

Donovan Correctional Facility, located in San Diego County, which is within the jurisdictional

boundaries of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. 28 U.S.C.

§ 84(d). Thus, jurisdiction exists in both the Central and Southern Districts.

When a habeas petitioner is challenging a judgment of conviction, the district court of the

district in which the judgment of conviction was entered is a more convenient forum because of

the accessibility of evidence, records and witnesses. Thus, it is generally the practice of the

district courts in California to transfer habeas actions questioning judgments of conviction to the

district in which the judgment was entered. Any and all records, witnesses and evidence

necessary for the resolution of Petitioner’s contentions are available in Los Angeles County. See

Braden, 410 U.S. at 497, 499 n.15 (stating that a court can, of course, transfer habeas cases to

the district of conviction which is ordinarily a more convenient forum); Laue v. Nelson, 279

F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). 

Therefore, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court

transfer this matter to the United States District Court for the Central District of California,

Western Division. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of

this Court serve a copy of this Order upon Petitioner and upon the California Attorney General.

DATED: August 6, 2007

Hon. Roger T. Benitez

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-01401-BEN-WMC Document 2 Filed 08/06/07 Page 2 of 2