Jimenez v. Jane/John Doe

Background

Pedro Jimenez, who is incarcerated at Sullivan Correctional Facility and was acting without a lawyer, submitted a letter dated May 16, 2024. He asked the court to extend the time for him to file a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state-court conviction. The opinion states that public records reflected he was incarcerated under a 2019 New York County conviction, but Jimenez did not identify that conviction in his request.

Court’s analysis

A petition under § 2254 allows a person in state custody to seek federal relief on the ground that the custody violates the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties. The court explained that Article III of the Constitution limits federal courts to actual legal disputes, called “cases” or “controversies.” Under controlling precedent, a federal court cannot decide whether a future habeas petition would be timely until the petition is actually filed.

The court also considered whether it could treat Jimenez’s request as the habeas petition itself. It concluded that it could not because the letter did not identify any grounds for challenging the state-court judgment. Without those allegations, the court could not treat the letter as a substantive request for habeas relief.

Disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied Jimenez’s request for an extension of time because the court lacked authority to grant that relief before a habeas petition was filed. The order did not decide whether Jimenez’s conviction or custody violated federal law. The court stated that the request did not make a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right and therefore directed that no certificate of appealability issue. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

The Clerk was directed to mail Jimenez the form for filing a § 2254 petition. The court directed the Clerk to close the case opened under this docket number.