(HC) Driver v. California Supreme Court ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BILLY DRIVER, No. 2:22-cv-0550 AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT, 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. This 19 court will not rule on petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis. 20 Petitioner appears to challenge the execution of his sentence. As a general rule, “[t]he 21 proper forum to challenge the execution of a sentence is the district where the prisoner is 22 confined.” Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249 (9th Cir. 1989). Petitioner is currently housed 23 at Kern Valley State Prison in Kern County. Kern County is part of the Fresno Division of the 24 United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. L.R. 120(d). 25 Pursuant to Local Rule 120(f), a civil action which has not been commenced in the proper 26 division of a court may, on the court’s own motion, be transferred to the proper division of the 27 court. Therefore, this action will be transferred to the Fresno Division of the court. This court 28 will not rule on petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis. ] Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. This court has not ruled on petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis; 3 2. This action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 4 | California sitting in Fresno; and 5 3. All future filings shall reference the new Fresno case number assigned and shall be 6 || filed at: United States District Court 7 Eastern District of California 2500 Tulare Street 8 Fresno, CA 93721 9 | DATED: March 29, 2022 . 10 ththienr—Chnp—e_ 1 ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28