Welton
- Donna Ryu
- 4:23-cv-02119
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Welton v. Phillips, Judge Ryu transferred Welton’s state-conviction habeas petition to the Eastern District of California.
Robert Welton’s federal challenge to his state-court conviction was transferred from the Northern District of California to the Eastern District of California; Bryan D. Phillips was the named respondent.
What happened
In Robert Welton v. Bryan D. Phillips, Robert Welton challenged the validity of a conviction from the Solano County Superior Court in a petition seeking federal review of his imprisonment.
Welton filed the petition while incarcerated at California State Prison–Corcoran and represented himself. He had not completed his application to proceed without paying the filing fee or paid the fee. Because the challenged conviction occurred in Solano County, the court determined that the Eastern District of California was the proper federal district.
Judge Donna M. Ryu transferred the case to the Eastern District of California in the interest of justice. The court also terminated the remaining pending motions on its docket because the case was no longer pending in that district.
The detailed version
- Welton · No. 4:23-cv-02119
- Donna Ryu
- June 7, 2023
Background
Robert Welton, a state prisoner incarcerated at California State Prison–Corcoran, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the validity of his conviction from the Solano County Superior Court. Welton proceeded without a lawyer. The opinion states that he had not completed his application to proceed without paying the filing fee or paid the filing fee.
Bryan D. Phillips, the current acting warden of the prison where Welton is incarcerated, was substituted as the respondent under Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Venue and Transfer
Federal law permits a state-prisoner habeas petition to be filed in either the federal district where the prisoner is confined or the district where the conviction occurred. The court may transfer the petition to the other district in the interest of justice. The opinion explains that challenges to a conviction or sentence are traditionally heard in the district where the conviction occurred, while challenges concerning how a sentence is carried out—such as parole or time-credit claims—are preferably heard where the prisoner is confined.
Welton challenged his conviction and sentence from the Solano County Superior Court. Because Solano County is within the Eastern District of California, the court determined that the Eastern District of California had jurisdiction over the matter.
Disposition
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) and Habeas Local Rule 2254-3(b), the court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California in the interest of justice. The Clerk was ordered to transfer the case immediately. The court also terminated all remaining pending motions on its docket because they were no longer pending in that district. Judge Donna M. Ryu did not decide the validity of Welton’s conviction in this order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.