(HC) Ruiz v. On Habeas Corpus

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 6, 20211:21-cv-00575California283 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOEY R. RUIZ,

Case No. 20-08594 EJD (PR) Petitioner, ORDER OF TRANSER v.

WARDEN, Respondent.

17 Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Dkt. No. 1. Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the district of conviction, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Federal courts in California traditionally have chosen to hear petitions challenging a conviction or sentence in the district of conviction or sentencing. See Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1); Dannenberg v. Ingle, 831 F. Supp. 767, 768 (N.D. Cal. 1993); Laue v. Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). According to the petition, Petitioner was convicted in Kings County, Dkt. No. 1 at 1, which lies within the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b). Petitioner is currently confined at Deuel Vocational Institution in San Joaquin County …

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.