Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00861/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00861-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

ro 12 

t:•-

=' E 0,£ 13 U:.::: 

..... ro .~ u 14 l:<+-< 

.~ 0 

Clt) 15 tfj ·c 

d) ..... ..... Vl 

ro ·- 16 cZiCl 

-o E 

d) d) 

.~ 17 ...s:::: 

= t: :::::> 0 z 18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

KENDYL WELCH, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

JERRY BROWN, 

Respondent. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

FILED 

JUN 7 7 2016 

Case No. 16-cv-02059 LHK (PR) 

ORDER OF TRANSFER 

Petitioner has filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner is being held in 

Coalinga State Hospital in Coalinga, California, under California's Sexual Violent Predator Act 

("SVPA"). See Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code §§ 6600, et seq. In his petition, petitioner argues that the 

California Department of State Hospitals is violating his double jeopardy rights by using certain 

standards, procedures, and assessment tools to determine if he is a Sexually Violent Predator. He 

also argues that Younger abstention is not appropriate. 

The petition is properly brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3), which provides habeas 

corpus jurisdiction over any person held in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or 

treaties ofthe United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3); see, e.g., Jones v. McClain, No. 07-cvCase No. 16-cv-02059 LHK (PR) 

ORDER OF TRANSFER 

Case 1:16-cv-00861-EPG Document 13 Filed 06/17/16 Page 1 of 2
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

Cl;l 12 t:: ..... :s E oc.£ 13 U:.::: 

.... Cl;l 

-~ u 14 l-.4-; ti 0 

au 15 oo ·c (!) .... .... <ll Cl;l ..... 

.... o 16 

~ E d) d) 

.~ 17 ..s:: 

s::t:: 

:::::> 0 z 18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

06212-PA (VBK), 2008 WL 538672, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2008) (recognizing that pretrial 

petitions filed by a civil detainee awaiting SVP A trial "has available the general grant of habeas 

corpus authority found in Title 28 U.S.C. § 2241 where he is in pre-commitment custody and 

accordingly, a writ pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is unavailable to him."). Although this court may 

have jurisdiction to hear a petition brought under Section 2241, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit 

Court, 410 U.S. 484, 494-95 (1973), Braden makes clear that "venue considerations may, and 

frequently will, argue in favor of adjudication of the habeas claim in the jurisdiction where the 

habeas petitioner is confined." Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh, 864 F.2d 804, 813 (D.C. Cir. 1988). 

The preferable forum for a Section 2241 habeas petition is the district of confinement. See McCoy 

v. United States Bd. of Parole, 537 F.2d 962, 966 (8th Cir. 1976); see also Dunne v. Henman, 875 

F.2d 244, 249-50 (9th Cir. 1989) (suggesting that even where district court has personal 

jurisdiction over custodian, preferred forum for 2241 petition is district where petitioner confined). 

The commitment proceedings are in Santa Clara County, which is in this district, and 

petitioner is confined in Fresno County, which is in the Eastern District of California. See 28 

U.S.C. § 84. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b), and in the interests of 

justice, this petition is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District 

of California. 

The clerk shall terminate all pending motions, and transfer this matter forthwith. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: ~I'~ I 2D l ~ 

Case No. 16-cv-02059 LHK (PR) 

ORDER OF TRANSFER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

2 

Case 1:16-cv-00861-EPG Document 13 Filed 06/17/16 Page 2 of 2