Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled July 18, 2024

Murphy

Judge
Edward Davila
Docket
5:24-cv-04281
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
HabeasCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Ladarius D. Murphy v. Sacramento County Court, Judge Davila transferred the conviction challenge to the Eastern District of California because Sacramento was the conviction district.

Who this affects

Ladarius D. Murphy's conviction challenge was transferred from the Northern District of California to the Eastern District of California; the order directed the clerk to transfer the entire file and terminate pending motions.

What happened

Ladarius D. Murphy, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition challenging his state conviction from Sacramento County. He filed it in the Northern District of California.

The court explained that a state-conviction challenge may be heard in the district where the prisoner is confined or where the conviction occurred. Murphy is confined in Del Norte County, but his conviction occurred in Sacramento County.

Judge Davila transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions and transfer the complete case file.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Murphy · No. 5:24-cv-04281
Judge
Edward Davila
Date
July 18, 2024

Background

Ladarius D. Murphy, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state conviction from Sacramento County. The petition was filed in the Northern District of California. Murphy stated that he was confined at Pelican Bay State Prison in Del Norte County.

Venue analysis

The court explained that venue for a state-conviction challenge is proper either in the federal district where the prisoner is confined or in the district where the conviction occurred. The court noted that California federal courts traditionally hear challenges to a conviction or sentence in the district of conviction or sentencing. Because Murphy's conviction was from Sacramento County, the court determined that the preferred venue was the Eastern District of California, which includes Sacramento County, rather than the Northern District of California.

Ruling

The court transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions and transfer the entire file. The order did not rule on the validity of Murphy's conviction or the substance of his petition.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.