Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 18, 2024

Bolin

Judge
Jeffrey White
Docket
4:24-cv-00233
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Bolin v. Warden, Judge White transferred Bolin’s state-court habeas petition from the Northern District of California to the Eastern District of California.

Who this affects

Bolin’s habeas petition was transferred from the Northern District of California to the Eastern District of California; the order did not decide the petition’s merits.

What happened

Bolin, a California prisoner without an attorney, filed a notice seeking relief from a criminal judgment in Kern County Superior Court. The court treated the filing as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under federal law.

Because the petition challenged a Kern County judgment and both Kern County and Bolin’s place of confinement are in the Eastern District of California, the court transferred the case there in the interest of justice. The court did not decide the petition’s underlying claims.

Judge Jeffrey White ordered the Clerk to transfer the matter immediately. The order transferred the case but did not rule on whether Bolin is entitled to habeas relief.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Bolin · No. 4:24-cv-00233
Judge
Jeffrey White
Date
Jan. 18, 2024

Background

Bolin, a California prisoner proceeding without an attorney at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville, filed a “notice of independent action” seeking relief from a criminal judgment issued by the Kern County Superior Court. The court construed the filing as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Transfer Analysis

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d), a state prisoner in California may file a habeas petition in either the federal district where the prisoner is confined or the federal district where the state conviction occurred. Those districts have concurrent jurisdiction, meaning either may hear the petition, but the district where the petition is filed may transfer it to the other district in the interest of justice.

The court stated that federal courts in California traditionally hear petitions challenging a conviction or sentence in the federal district containing the district of conviction. Kern County and Vacaville, where Bolin was confined, are both within the Eastern District of California’s venue.

Disposition

The court transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California in the interest of justice and directed the Clerk to transfer the matter forthwith. The order addressed venue only; it did not decide the merits of Bolin’s habeas claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.