Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DEMOS v. U.S., 2:15-cv-0204 CKD HC. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20150331a59 Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 30, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 30, 2015
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner, a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. Petitioner is presently incarcerated at the Washington State Penitentiary in Walla Walla, Washington. He challenges criminal proceedings in the Yakima County Superior Court. (ECF No. 1 at 2.) Relief under a petition for writ of habeas corpus extends to a person in custody under the authority of the United States.
More

ORDER

Petitioner, a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner is presently incarcerated at the Washington State Penitentiary in Walla Walla, Washington. He challenges criminal proceedings in the Yakima County Superior Court. (ECF No. 1 at 2.)

Relief under a petition for writ of habeas corpus extends to a person in custody under the authority of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). A federal prisoner may "challenge the manner in which a sentence is executed" by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Capaldi v. Pontesso, 135 F.3d 1122, 1123 (6th Cir. 1998). A petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 "must be addressed to the district court which has jurisdiction over [petitioner] or his custodian." Brown v. United States, 610 F.2d 672, 677 (9th Cir. 1980), citing Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973).

Here, petitioner does not appear to be a federal prisoner to whom § 2241 applies. In any event, the general rule with regard to habeas applications is that both the United States District Court in the district where petitioner was convicted and the District Court where petitioner is incarcerated have jurisdiction over the claims. See Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973). In the instant case, petitioner's place of incarceration is in an area covered by the District Court for the Eastern District of Washington.

Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer