The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CHRISTOPHER WILEY BROWN :
Petitioner : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:20-1202
v. : (JUDGE MANNION)
:
Superintendent, SCI-Somerset,
:
Respondent
MEMORANDUM
I. Background
Petitioner, Christopher Wiley Brown, an inmate confined in the State
Correctional Institution, Somerset, Pennsylvania, filed the instant petition for
writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. (Doc. 1). He challenges
a sentence imposed by the Fayette County Court of Common Pleas. Id.
For the reasons outlined below, the petition will be transferred to the
United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
II. Discussion
“The federal habeas corpus statute straightforwardly provides that the
proper respondent to a habeas petition is ‘the person who has custody over
[the petitioner], 28 U.S.C. §2242, see also §2243 ....’[T]hese provisions
contemplate a proceeding against some person who has the immediate
custody of the party detained, with the power to produce the body of such
party before the court or judge, that he may be liberated if no sufficient
reason is shown to the contrary.” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 433-436
(2004)(citations omitted). There is no question that this Court has jurisdiction
over Brown’s petition. However, notwithstanding the issue of jurisdiction, a
court may transfer any civil action for the convenience of the parties or
witnesses, or in the interest of justice, to any district where the action might
have been brought. 28 U.S.C. §1404(a); See also, Braden v. 30th Judicial
Circuit of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (1973). Because habeas proceedings are
generally considered civil in nature, see Hinton v. Braunskill, 481 U.S. 770,
776 (1987), the term “civil action” includes habeas petitions. Parrott v.
Government of Virgin Islands, 230 F.3d 615, 620 (3d Cir. 2000).
Title 28 U.S.C. §2241 (d) provides:
(d) Where an application for a writ of habeas corpus is made by a
person in custody under the judgment and sentence of a State court of
a State which contains two or more Federal judicial districts, the
application may be filed in the district court for the district wherein such
person is in custody or in the district court for the district within which
the State court was held which convicted and sentenced him and each
of such district courts shall have concurrent jurisdiction to entertain the
application. The district court for the district wherein such an
application is filed in the exercise of its discretion and in furtherance of
justice may transfer the application to the other district court for hearing
and determination.
Since the amendment of that section, it has been the agreed practice
of the United States District Courts for the Eastern, Middle
and Western Districts of Pennsylvania, to transfer any habeas petitions filed
by a petitioner incarcerated in their respective districts to the district which
includes the county where the conviction was had. The Petitioner is attacking
a sentence imposed by the Court of Common Pleas for Fayette County,
Pennsylvania. Since the trial court, as well as any records, witnesses and
counsel, are located within the United States District Court for
the Western District of Pennsylvania, it would be prudent to transfer this
action to the Western District.
A separate Order will be issued.
s/ Malachy E. Mannion
MALACHY E. MANNION
United States District Judge
DATE: December 3, 2020
20-1202-01