UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

TODD A. WILSON, :

Petitioner :

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-1789

v. :

(Judge Mannion)

Warden, SCI-CAMP HILL, :

:

Respondent

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner, Todd A. Wilson, an inmate confined in the State Correctional

Institution, Camp Hill, (“SCI-Camp Hill”) Pennsylvania, filed the instant petition

for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. He challenges a

conviction imposed by the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas. (Doc.

1). For the reasons outlined below, the petition will be transferred to the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Discussion

“The federal habeas corpus statute straightforwardly provides that the

proper respondent to a habeas petition is ‘the person who has custody over [the

petitioner]. 28 U.S.C. §2242, see also §2243. . . .’[T]hese provisions contemplate

a proceeding against some person who has the immediate custody of the party

detained, with the power to produce the body of such party before the court or

Case 3:15-cv-01789-MEM-DB Document 4 Filed 09/28/15 Page 1 of 3
judge, that he may be liberated if no sufficient reason is shown to the contrary.”

Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 433-436 (2004)(citations omitted). There is

no question that this Court has jurisdiction over Borelli’s petition.

However, notwithstanding the issue of jurisdiction, a court may transfer any

civil action for the convenience of the parties or witnesses, or in the interest of

justice, to any district where the action might have been brought. 28 U.S.C.

§1404(a); See also, Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484

(1973). Because habeas proceedings are generally considered civil in nature,

see Hinton v. Braunskill, 481 U.S. 770, 776 (1987), the term “civil action”

includes habeas petitions. Parrott v. Government of Virgin Islands, 230 F.3d 615,

620 (3d Cir. 2000).

Title 28 U.S.C. §2241(d) provides:

(d) Where an application for a writ of habeas corpus is made by a

person in custody under the judgment and sentence of a State court

of a State which contains two or more Federal judicial districts, the

application may be filed in the district court for the district wherein

such person is in custody or in the district court for the district within

which the State court was held which convicted and sentenced him

and each of such district courts shall have concurrent jurisdiction to

entertain the application. The district court for the district wherein

such an application is filed in the exercise of its discretion and in

furtherance of justice may transfer the application to the other district

court for hearing and determination.

Since the amendment of that section, it has been the agreed practice of the

2

Case 3:15-cv-01789-MEM-DB Document 4 Filed 09/28/15 Page 2 of 3
United States District Courts for the Eastern, Middle and Western Districts of

Pennsylvania, to transfer any habeas petitions filed by a petitioner incarcerated

in their respective districts to the district which includes the county where the

conviction was had. The Petitioner is attacking a conviction imposed by the Court

of Common Pleas for Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Since the trial court,

as well as any records, witnesses and counsel, are located within the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, it would be prudent

to transfer this action to the Eastern District. A separate Order will be issued.

s/ Malachy E. Mannion 

MALACHY E. MANNION

United States District Judge

Date: September 28, 2015

O:\Mannion\shared\MEMORANDA - DJ\CIVIL MEMORANDA\2015 MEMORANDA\15-1789-01.wpd

3

Case 3:15-cv-01789-MEM-DB Document 4 Filed 09/28/15 Page 3 of 3