(HC) Cardenas v. CDCR ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANNY CARDENAS, Jr., No. 2:19-cv-2110 KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 CDCR, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. 19 The application attacks a conviction issued by the Alameda County. While both this court 20 and the United States District Court in the district where petitioner was convicted have 21 jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), any and all witnesses 22 and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner’s application are more readily available in 23 Alameda County. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). 24 Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. This court has not ruled on petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis; and 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of 2 | California. 3 | Dated: October 23, 2019 ‘ Frese Arn 5 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 card2110.108 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28