IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 4, 2009
RONALD RUSSELL, PETITIONER,
JAMES HARTLEY, RESPONDENT.
Petitioner, a prisoner without counsel, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
Petitioner is presently incarcerated at Avenal State Prison in Kings County. Petitioner is serving a sentence for a conviction rendered by the Alameda County Superior Court. While petitioner does not challenge a particular finding of parole unsuitability, he appears to claim that the Board of Parole Hearings violated his due process and equal protection rights at each of his fourteen parole suitability hearings. Pet. at 5, 9. In habeas corpus cases, venue is proper: (1) in the district of confinement, or (2) in the district of "conviction and sentencing." 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Because it is difficult to stretch "conviction and sentencing" into a decision denying parole suitability, only the first venue option is appropriate. Moreover, since prisoners are not normally transferred about for parole eligibility hearings, the district of confinement would normally be the district of "conviction and sentencing" even if that rubric were utilized in the parole eligibility setting.*fn1
Petitioner is confined in Kings County which is also where his October 11, 2006 parole suitability hearing took place. See Pet. at unnumbered page 219. Thus, this action should have been commenced in the district court in Fresno.*fn2 Local Rule 120(d).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. This action is transferred to the district court in Fresno. See Local Rule 120(f).
2. The Clerk of Court shall assign a new case number.
3. All future filings shall bear the new case number and shall be filed at: United States District Court Eastern District of California 2500 Tulare Street Fresno, CA 93721.