From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McElroy v. A.A. Lamarque

United States District Court, N.D. California
Jul 8, 2002
Respondent. No. C 02-2789 MMC (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2002)

Opinion

Respondent. No. C 02-2789 MMC (PR)

July 8, 2002


ORDER OF TRANSFER


Petitioner seeks to challenge a conviction obtained in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Petitioner is incarcerated in Soledad, California, which is located in Monterey County. Los Angeles County is located in the Central District of California, and Monterey County is located within this district. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(a), (c). Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the district of conviction, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d), and petitions challenging a conviction are preferably heard in the district of conviction. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(a); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968); cf. Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989) (holding district of confinement is best forum to review execution of sentence).

Because petitioner was convicted in Los Angeles County, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a); Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b). In light of the transfer, this Court will not rule on the petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

The clerk shall transfer this matter forthwith and terminate all pending motions from the Court's docket.


Summaries of

McElroy v. A.A. Lamarque

United States District Court, N.D. California
Jul 8, 2002
Respondent. No. C 02-2789 MMC (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2002)
Case details for

McElroy v. A.A. Lamarque

Case Details

Full title:LATWAHN McELROY, Petitioner, v. A.A. LAMARQUE, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California

Date published: Jul 8, 2002

Citations

Respondent. No. C 02-2789 MMC (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2002)