Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01525/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-01525-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:2241fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

li1~ AUG 2 9 AH IQ: ll 

8 

9 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

10 

11 JONATHAN CHAMPEAU, 

12 Petitioner, 

13 v. 

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, 

ORANGE COUNTY, 

Respondent. 

Case No.: 17cv1525 BEN (BGS) 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

14 

15 

16 

17 Petitioner, proceeding prose, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant 

18 to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

19 FAILURE TO SATISFY FILING FEE REQUIREMENT 

20 Petitioner has failed to pay the $5.00 filing fee and has failed to move to proceed in 

21 forma pauperis. This Court cannot proceed until Petitioner has either paid the $5.00 

22 filing fee or qualified to proceed in forma pauperis. See Rule 3(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. 

23 JURISDICTIONAL CUSTODY REQUIREMENT 

24 Petitioner is not currently in either actual or constructive custody, and thus this 

25 Court does not have habeas jurisdiction. A habeas petitioner who challenges a state court 

26 conviction must establish he is "in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws ... of 

27 the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). Current imprisonment or constructive custody, 

28 such as a petitioner's status on probation or parole, is required to satisfy the custody 

I 

l 7cvl525 BEN (BGS) 

Case 3:17-cv-01525-BEN-BGS Document 2 Filed 08/29/17 PageID.<pageID> 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 

requirement. See, e.g., Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 243 (1963) (parole); United 

States v. Span, 75 F.3d 1383, 1386 n.5 (9th Cir. 1996) (probation); United States v. 

Gaudin, 28 F.3d 943, 965 (9th Cir. 1994) (en bane) (probation). 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice. 

The Court notes that if Petitioner can satisfy the custody requirement by virtue of being 

imprisoned, or being on probation or parole, the proper venue for a challenge to his 

conviction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 would be the United States District Court for the 

Central District of Califl ecause his conviction occurred in 

Rog mtez 

Umted States District Judge 

2 

17cv1525 BEN (BGS) 

Case 3:17-cv-01525-BEN-BGS Document 2 Filed 08/29/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2