Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00072/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00072-0/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARLON VINCENT De La Torre,

Petitioner,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGAR,

Respondent.

 /

CV F 06-0072 REC SMS HC

ORDER OF TRANSFER

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Petitioner filed the instant petition on January 23, 2006. On the form petition, Petitioner

indicates that he was convicted and sentenced in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, which

is located within the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Petitioner

is currently incarcerated at Chino State Prison, which is also within the jurisdiction of the Central

District of California. Petitioner is challenging a parole revocation hearing. 

The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity

jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all

defendants reside in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events

or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the

subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if

there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

Case 1:06-cv-00072-REC -SMS Document 5 Filed 03/01/06 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

2

Because Petitioner is challenging a parole revocation hearing from Los Angeles County,

which is within the Central District of California, the petition should have been filed in the

United States District Court for the Central District of California. In the interest of justice, a

federal court may transfer a case filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28

U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir.1974).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United

States District Court for the Central District of California.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 1, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

ah0l4d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00072-REC -SMS Document 5 Filed 03/01/06 Page 2 of 2