Rosa v. Gamboa
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:25-cv-00286
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In (HC) Rosa v. Gamboa, Judge Rogers transferred Rosa’s state-conviction petition to Northern California because Sonoma County is there.
Toby Anthony Rosa’s federal challenge to his state conviction was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division; the order did not decide the challenge’s merits.
What happened
In (HC) Rosa v. Gamboa, Toby Anthony Rosa challenged his state conviction in a petition filed under federal law. The opinion says the conviction came from Sonoma County Superior Court.
Rosa’s petition was filed in the Eastern District of California, but Sonoma County is within the Northern District of California’s San Francisco Division. The court explained that cases challenging a conviction are generally handled where the conviction occurred because relevant records, witnesses, and evidence are usually there.
Judge Rogers ordered the Clerk to transfer the case to the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division. The order did not decide whether Rosa’s challenge to his conviction was valid.
The detailed version
- Rosa v. Gamboa · No. 4:25-cv-00286
- Yvonne Rogers
- Jan. 3, 2025
Background
Toby Anthony Rosa filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. To the extent the petition could be understood, it challenged a state conviction entered by the Superior Court of Sonoma County. The opinion identifies Martin Gamboa as the respondent.
Transfer analysis
The court explained that when a person in custody under a state-court judgment files a habeas petition in a state with multiple federal districts, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d) permits filing either where the person is confined or where the person was convicted and sentenced. For challenges to a conviction or sentence, the conviction district is generally more convenient because trial records, witnesses, and other evidence are usually located there.
Sonoma County is within the jurisdiction and venue of the Northern District of California’s San Francisco Division. The court therefore found, in its discretion and in furtherance of justice, that the petition should be transferred under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404(a) and 2241(d).
Ruling
The court ordered the Clerk to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division. It also ordered that future filings reference the new case number and be filed at that court’s San Francisco Division address. The order did not reach the merits of Rosa’s challenge to his state conviction.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.