Carter v. 1 John Doe [Black Male]

Background

David Carter, who is incarcerated at Marcy Correctional Facility, represented himself and was proceeding without prepaying the filing fee. He sued John Doe correction officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that they interfered with his legal mail while he was incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility in 2021.

On December 16, 2024, the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Carter was barred by the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), from filing a new action without prepaying the filing fee unless he showed that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court previously found that the legal-mail allegations did not show that kind of danger. Carter appealed, and the appeal remained pending in the Second Circuit.

Carter later filed three motions for reconsideration, two letters, an affidavit, and a motion seeking release and emergency injunctive relief. In the emergency motion, he alleged threats from correctional staff and other prisoners.

Appeal-Extension Motion

The court held that it could consider Carter’s first reconsideration motion because it was received within 28 days after judgment, even though the notice of appeal generally transferred control of the appealed matters to the court of appeals.

The court denied Carter’s motion for an extension of time to appeal as unnecessary. Although the court received the notice of appeal and extension request on January 7, 2025, Carter signed them on December 27, 2024. Applying the rule that a prisoner’s filing is treated as filed when given to prison officials for mailing, the court treated the notice as timely under the 30-day deadline.

Motions for Reconsideration

The court denied reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and Local Civil Rule 6.3. Those rules require a party to show that the court overlooked controlling law or factual matters previously presented. Carter did not dispute that he had three strikes. Instead, he argued that his allegations of threats showed imminent danger.

The court found no adequate connection between the alleged danger and the claims in this case. The complaint concerned legal-mail interference at Green Haven in 2021, while the emergency motion concerned threats at Marcy four years later. No Marcy employees were defendants, and a favorable decision on the legal-mail claims would not address injuries from the alleged threats. The court therefore found that Carter had not shown that it overlooked controlling law or facts.

The court also denied relief under every applicable ground of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), which allows a court to relieve a party from a judgment for specified reasons such as mistake, newly discovered evidence, misconduct, a void judgment, or other extraordinary circumstances. The court found that Carter had not shown that any of the first five grounds applied and had not shown the extraordinary circumstances required for relief under Rule 60(b)(6).

Emergency Injunctive Relief

The court denied Carter’s request for emergency injunctive relief. To obtain that relief, he had to show likely irreparable harm and either a likelihood of success on the merits or serious questions supporting the case combined with a sharply favorable balance of hardships. The court held that Carter had shown neither a likelihood of success nor sufficiently serious questions on the merits.

Disposition

The court denied all outstanding motions and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate them. The matter remains closed in the district court, while Carter’s appeal remains pending in the Second Circuit. The court also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Carter permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee for such an appeal.