(HC) Bejarano v. Gonzales

Docket 2:25-cv-02574

Filed
2025-09-08
Terminated
Not recorded
Case type
cv

Outcome

transferred to another district

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=72 OFFICE=2 DOCKET=2502574 FILEDATE=09/08/2025 DISP=0, PROCPROG=2, JUDGMENT=0; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RODRIGO EDWARD BEJARANO, III, No. 2:25-cv-02574-EFB (PC) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 ANDRE GONZALES, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. 19 The application attacks a conviction issued by the Santa Clara County Superior Court. 20 While both this court and the United States District Court in the district where petitioner was 21 convicted have jurisdiction, see Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), any 22 and all witnesses and evidence necessary for the resolution of petitioner’s application are more 23 readily available in Santa Clara County. Id. at 499 n.15; 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). 24 //// 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// ] Accordingly, in the furtherance of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of 3 | California. 4 5 || Dated: November 20, 2025 4 Bata Z Ze £ 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.