Van Huisen v. County of Alameda ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GREGORY SCOTT VAN HUISEN, No. 2:23-cv-1180 DB P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, 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 Superior Court of Alameda. (ECF No. 20 1 at 1.) While both this court and the United States District Court in the district where petitioner 21 was convicted have jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), 22 any and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner’s application are 23 more readily available in Alameda County. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). 24 //// 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 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 | Dated: June 24, 2023 g ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 DB:12 13 || DB/DB Prisoner Inbox/Habeas/R/vanh1 180.108 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28