(HC) Hatchett v. Clark ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CECIL JEROME HATCHETT, No. 2:24-cv-1390 CSK P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 KEN CLARK, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 Monterey County Superior Court. 20 While both this court and the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 21 the district where petitioner was convicted, have jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit 22 Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), any and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of 23 petitioner’s application are more readily available in Monterey County, which is located in the 24 Northern District of California. See id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// ] Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. This court has not ruled on petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis; and 3 2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of 4 | California. 5 6 || Dated: May 21, 2024 Ane Spo CHI SOO KIM 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 || /1/nate1390.108 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28