Warden

James Michael Fayed v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 2, 20252:25-cv-05678California251 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES MICHAEL FAYED, No. 2:25-cv-01407-DAD-DMC-P 12 Petitioner,

ORDER

13 v. 14 WARDEN, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of 18 habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition challenges a conviction and/or sentence 19 issued by the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 2241(d), courts in 20 both the district of conviction and the district of confinement have concurrent jurisdiction over 21 applications for habeas corpus filed by state prisoners. See Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 22 410 U.S. 484 (1973). Because any and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of 23 Petitioner's application are more readily available in Los Angeles County, which is within the 24 boundaries of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, this matter 25 should be transferred to that court. See id. at 499 n.15. 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / ] …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.