Kibunguchy v. Shnider

Background

Chris W. Kibunguchy, a California inmate incarcerated at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 without a lawyer. The court stated that the allegations appeared to attempt to assert civil-rights claims against personnel at that facility. The court therefore considered the proper venue under both possible characterizations of the filing.

Venue analysis

For a state-prisoner habeas petition, the court explained that venue may lie in the district of confinement or the district of conviction, and that the filing court may transfer the case in the interest of justice. According to the petition, Kibunguchy was in custody pursuant to a ruling by the Solano County Parole Board. Because Solano County lies in the Eastern District of California, the court concluded that the habeas petition belonged there rather than in the Northern District.

The court also concluded that the Eastern District was the proper venue if the filing were treated as a civil-rights complaint. The alleged unconstitutional conduct occurred at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville, which is in the Eastern District. The court applied the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), and reached the same venue result.

Disposition

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) and Habeas Local Rule 2254-3(b), the court ordered the Clerk to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Judge Vince Chhabria also ordered that all pending motions be terminated on the Northern District’s docket. The order did not decide whether Kibunguchy was entitled to habeas relief or whether his alleged civil-rights claims were valid.