Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
WARD v. SUPERIOR COURT OF MERCED
JOHNNY L. WARD, Petitioner,
v.
SUPERIOR COURT OF MERCED, Respondent.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: MAXINE CHESNEY, District Judge
Petitioner, a California prisoner, has filed this pro se
petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254. He challenges a conviction obtained in the Superior Court
of Merced County. Venue for a habeas action is proper in either
the district of confinement or the district of conviction, see
28 U.S.C. § 2241(d), although petitions challenging a conviction
preferably are 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 proper forum to review
execution of sentence). Merced County is located in the Eastern
District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b).
Accordingly, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of California. See
28 U.S.C. § 1404(a); Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b).
The Clerk shall close the file and terminate any pending
motions on the court's docket.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw ...