Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00304/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00304-0/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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DEXTER L. GRIFFIN, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CA, 

 Respondent. 

Case No. 19-07698 EJD (PR) 

ORDER OF TRANSER

Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus 

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Docket No. 1.) It is unclear whether he is challenging the 

computation of time credits, (id.), or the underlying conviction out of Sacramento County, 

(id. at 6-8). 

Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the 

district of conviction, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Federal courts in California traditionally have 

chosen to hear petitions challenging a conviction or sentence in the district of conviction or 

sentencing. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1); Dannenberg v. Ingle, 831 F. Supp. 767, 768 

(N.D. Cal. 1993); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). But if the 

petition challenges the manner in which a sentence is being executed, e.g., if it involves 

parole or time credits claims, the district of confinement is the preferable forum. See 

Case 2:20-cv-00304-KJM-KJN Document 14 Filed 02/07/20 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 Californi

a

Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(2); Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989). 

Petitioner was convicted in Sacramento County which lies within the Eastern 

District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b). Petitioner is currently confined at Coalinga 

State Hospital, (Docket No. 1 at 1), in Fresno County which is also within the Eastern 

District. Id. Therefore, the venue for this action is in that district and not in this one. See 

id.; Habeas L.R. 2254-3(a)(1). Accordingly, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United 

States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); 

Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1). 

The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions and transfer the entire file to the 

Eastern District of California. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _____________________ ________________________ 

EDWARD J. DAVILA 

United States District Judge 

Order of Transfer 

PRO-SE\EJD\HC.19\07698Griffin_transfer(ED) 

2/7/2020

Case 2:20-cv-00304-KJM-KJN Document 14 Filed 02/07/20 Page 2 of 2