Kabede v. California Governors Parole Board Hearing Dept.
- Edward Davila
- 5:21-cv-05366
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Kabede v. CA Governor’s Parole Board Hearing Dep’t, Judge Davila transferred the parole challenge to the Eastern District of California because venue was there.
Wondiyrad Kabede’s parole challenge was transferred from the Northern District of California to the Eastern District of California; the order also terminated all pending motions in the Northern District.
What happened
Wondiyrad Kabede, a California prisoner representing himself, filed a petition challenging the denial of parole on January 9, 2020. He later filed an amended petition after the court allowed him to address state-court exhaustion.
The court explained that parole and time-credit cases are generally handled where the prisoner is confined. Kabede was confined at the California Health Care Facility in San Joaquin County, which is in the Eastern District of California.
Judge Edward J. Davila ruled that the case belonged in that district and transferred it there. The clerk was ordered to close all pending motions and send the entire case file to the Eastern District of California.
The detailed version
- Kabede v. California Governors Parole Board Hearing Dept. · No. 5:21-cv-05366
- Edward Davila
- Apr. 7, 2022
Background
Wondiyrad Kabede, a California prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the denial of parole on January 9, 2020. On November 9, 2021, the court dismissed the petition with leave to amend concerning exhaustion of state judicial remedies. Kabede then filed an amended petition.
Venue analysis
The court stated that venue for a § 2254 petition is proper either in the district where the prisoner is confined or in the district where the conviction occurred. It explained that California federal courts traditionally hear challenges to convictions or sentences in the district of conviction or sentencing, while parole or time-credit challenges are preferably heard in the district of confinement.
Kabede’s amended petition challenged the denial of parole. He was confined at the California Health Care Facility in San Joaquin County. Because San Joaquin County is within the Eastern District of California, the court concluded that venue properly lay there rather than in the Northern District of California.
Disposition
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 statute permitting transfer when venue is improper. The clerk was ordered to terminate all pending motions and transfer the entire file. The order did not decide the merits of Kabede’s challenge to the denial of parole.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.