Rogers v. Virga ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMAR RAYLEE ROGERS, No. C 11-1653 WHA (PR) 12 Petitioner, ORDER OF TRANSFER 13 v. 14 VIRGA, Warden, 15 Respondent. / (Docket No. 3) 16 17 In this habeas case petitioner seeks to challenge a conviction and sentence incurred in 18 the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Los Angeles County is in the venue of the United 19 States District Court for the Central District of California. 28 U.S.C. 84. Petitioner is 20 incarcerated at New Folsom State Prison, in Sacramento, which is in the venue of the Eastern 21 District of California. Ibid. 22 Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the district of 23 conviction, 28 U.S.C. 2241(d); however, petitions challenging a conviction are preferably heard 24 in the district of conviction. Habeas L.R. 2254-3(a); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 25 (N.D. Cal. 1968). Because petitioner was convicted in Central District, this case is 26 TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. See 28 27 // 28 // U.S.C. § 1406(a); Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b). Ruling on the request for an extension of time in which to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis will be deferred to the Central District. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Ler Prbne Dated: August 29, 2011. 5 WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 é 13 614 2 15 16 17 18 G:\PRO-SE\WHA\HC.11\ROGERS3751.TRN.wpd 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28