Weisner v. Allison
- Susan Van Keulen
- 5:22-cv-07419
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Weisner v. Allison, Judge Van Keulen transferred the state prisoner’s sentence challenge to the Eastern District of California because Sacramento County was the preferred venue.
Frankie J. Weisner’s federal challenge to his Sacramento County sentence was transferred from the Northern District of California to the Eastern District of California; the court did not decide the challenge’s merits.
What happened
In Weisner v. Allison, Frankie J. Weisner, a state prisoner, challenged a sentence from Sacramento County Superior Court through a petition asking a federal court to review his imprisonment. He argued that a California law entitled him to removal of a prior-strike enhancement.
The court explained that a sentence challenge may be heard where the prisoner is confined or where the conviction occurred, but that the preferred location is the district of conviction. Because Sacramento County is in the Eastern District of California, the case was transferred there.
Judge Susan Van Keulen ordered the transfer under the federal venue statute, directed the clerk to close all pending motions, and ordered the entire case file sent to the Eastern District of California. The court did not decide whether the sentence challenge was valid.
The detailed version
- Weisner v. Allison · No. 5:22-cv-07419
- Susan Van Keulen
- Feb. 6, 2023
Background
Frankie J. Weisner, identified as a state prisoner at the California Training Facility, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 asking a federal court to review a sentence imposed by the Superior Court of Sacramento County. Weisner claimed that he was entitled to have a prior-strike enhancement removed because California Penal Code § 654 prohibits multiple punishments for the same offense.
Venue analysis
The court explained that federal law permits a state prisoner’s sentence challenge to be heard either in the federal district where the prisoner is confined or in the federal district where the conviction occurred. The court stated, however, that challenges to a conviction or sentence are preferably heard in the district of conviction.
Sacramento County is within the Eastern District of California. Because Weisner challenged the validity of his sentence, the court determined that the Eastern District of California was the preferred venue.
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 ordered to terminate all pending motions and transfer the entire case file. The order did not decide the merits of Weisner’s argument about the prior-strike enhancement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.