(HC) Mills v. CA Dept. of Corrections & Rehabilitation
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH W. MILLS, No. 2:19-cv-01831 GGH P Petitioner, v. ORDER CA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS &
REHABILITATION,
15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). To the extent the petition can be understood, the application attacks, in part, a conviction issued by the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. See ECF No. 1 at 3 ¶6. While both this court and the United States District Court in the district where petitioner was convicted have jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), any and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner’s application are more readily available in Los Angeles County. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). //// 27 …