Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00813/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00813-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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

Order Granting Motions for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; Order of Transfer

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.10\Medeiros385trans.wpd

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JULIAN GAGO DE MEDEIROS,

Petitioner,

 vs.

SUPERIOR COURT,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 10-5385 RMW (PR)

ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS

FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS; ORDER OF

TRANSFER

(Docket Nos. 3, 6.)

Petitioner is a federal detainee subject to removal proceedings and currently incarcerated

at CCA Eloy Detention Center in Eloy, Arizona. Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging his detention which is premised upon an

allegedly invalid 1995 state conviction. Petitioner’s motions for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis are GRANTED. For the reasons stated below, the court does not have jurisdiction to

adjudicate this matter, and TRANSFERS this case to the United States District Court of Arizona.

Generally, 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is the proper basis for a habeas petition by a state prisoner

who is not held “pursuant to the judgment of a State court,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254, for instance a pretrial detainee, a prisoner awaiting extradition, or a prisoner whose conviction has been reversed

on appeal. See Hoyle v. Ada County, 501 F.3d 1053, 1058 (9th Cir. 2007) (pre-trial double

jeopardy challenge); White v. Lambert, 370 F.3d 1002, 1006 (9th Cir. 2004) (listing “awaiting

extradition” and pretrial detention as examples of when § 2241 applies). In this case, petitioner’s

*E-FILED - 4/21/11*

Case 2:11-cv-00813-JAT--DKD Document 12 Filed 04/21/11 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

Order Granting Motions for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; Order of Transfer

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.10\Medeiros385trans.wpd 2

habeas petition must be transferred because jurisdiction does not lie in this district. Section 2241

allows “the Supreme Court, any justice thereof, the district courts and any circuit judge” to grant

writs of habeas corpus “within their respective jurisdictions.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a). The court

has interpreted the “within their respective jurisdictions” language of § 2241 to mean nothing

more than that the court issuing the writ must have jurisdiction over the custodian. Rumsfeld v.

Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 440-442 (2004). As to challenges under section 2241 to present physical

confinement, this is not synonymous with any district in which the respondent is amenable to

service of process. Id. at 442-44. “[F]or core habeas petitions challenging present physical

confinement, jurisdiction lies in only one district: the district of confinement.” Id. at 442-43. 

Because petitioner is currently being housed in Arizona, the Clerk of the Court shall

TRANSFER the entire file to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _______________ RONALD M. WHYTE 

United States District Judge

4/21/11

Case 2:11-cv-00813-JAT--DKD Document 12 Filed 04/21/11 Page 2 of 2