Free Order Dismissing Case - District Court of California - California


File Size: 17.3 kB
Pages: 2
Date: November 26, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: California
Category: District Court of California
Author: unknown
Word Count: 360 Words, 2,184 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/casd/258839/3.pdf

Download Order Dismissing Case - District Court of California ( 17.3 kB)


Preview Order Dismissing Case - District Court of California
Case 3:07-cv-02225-H-POR

Document 3

Filed 11/26/2007

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 v. GEORGE W. BUSH, et al., Respondents. JAN F. BECKER, Petitioner, ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE Civil No. 07cv2225-H (POR) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Petitioner, a prisoner incarcerated at the Mansfield Correctional Institution in Mansfield, Ohio, proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is challenging a conviction from the Holmes County Superior Court in Millersburg, Ohio. It is clear from the face of the Petition that the Southern District of California is not a proper venue for this action. A petition for writ of habeas corpus may be filed in the United States District Court of the judicial district in which the petitioner is presently confined or the judicial district in which he was convicted and sentenced. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973). Petitioner is presently confined in Mansfield, Ohio, which is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. See 28 U.S.C. § 115(a)(1). Petitioner is challenging a conviction from the Holmes County Superior Court in Millersburg, Ohio, which

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\H\07cv2225-Dismiss.wpd, 11267

-1-

07cv2225

Case 3:07-cv-02225-H-POR

Document 3

Filed 11/26/2007

Page 2 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

is also within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. Id. Petitioner has therefore failed to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the instant Petition without prejudice to Petitioner to proceed with his claims in the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: November 26, 2007 MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CC:

ALL PARTIES

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\H\07cv2225-Dismiss.wpd, 11267

-2-

07cv2225