McCray v. Anderson
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-02247
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In McCray v. Anderson, Judge Briccetti ordered briefing on whether release from custody made McCray’s petition moot.
Cerious McCray, whose petition may be affected by the court’s mootness inquiry, and Adrian H. Anderson, who was permitted to file an opposition brief.
What happened
In McCray v. Anderson, the court noted that Cerious McCray had been released from custody, with post-release supervision reportedly ending April 11, 2023. The court questioned whether that release left a continuing injury or legal dispute.
The court ordered McCray to submit a brief by July 22, 2024, explaining why his petition was not moot, meaning no longer a live dispute. Adrian H. Anderson could file an opposition by August 21, 2024. Each brief could not exceed 15 pages.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not decide whether the petition was moot. He ordered additional briefing on that threshold issue and directed chambers to mail McCray a copy of the order.
The detailed version
- McCray v. Anderson · No. 7:20-cv-02247
- Vincent Briccetti
- June 20, 2024
Background
Cerious McCray is the petitioner, and Adrian H. Anderson is identified as the sheriff of Dutchess County Jail and the respondent. The order states that, according to the New York Department of Corrections and Community Supervision incarcerated-person lookup webpage, McCray had been released from custody. The webpage listed April 11, 2023, as the maximum expiration date for post-release supervision.
The court explained that a petitioner must show a concrete and continuing injury to establish a live case or controversy under Article III of the Constitution. It also noted that release from prison does not necessarily make a petition challenging a criminal conviction moot because the conviction may have continuing legal consequences. But if there is no material possibility that the petitioner will suffer such consequences, the petition is moot.
Order
The court directed McCray to file a supplemental brief by July 22, 2024, addressing why his petition was not moot. The respondent could file an opposition brief by August 21, 2024. The parties’ supplemental briefs could not exceed 15 pages. Chambers was directed to mail McCray a copy of the order at the address on the docket.
What the order decided
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not decide whether McCray’s petition was moot and did not grant or deny the petition. The order required additional briefing on whether the court continued to have a live dispute to decide.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.