IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 24, 2012
VESTER L. PATTERSON, PETITIONER,
RALPH M. DIAZ, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. This court will not rule on petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis.
Petitioner is incarcerated in California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility in Kings County and was convicted in Los Angeles County.*fn1 Petitioner's conviction in Los Angeles County is in an area embraced by the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 2241(d), courts in both the district of conviction and the district of confinement*fn2 have concurrent jurisdiction over applications for habeas corpus filed by state prisoners. However, while both this Court and the United States District Court in the district where petitioner was convicted have jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), any and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner's application are more readily available in Los Angeles County. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).
Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. This court has not ruled on petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis; and
2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California.