Ellawendy v. Monterey County Superior Court
- Beth Freeman
- 5:20-cv-02708
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Ellawendy v. Monterey County Superior Court, Judge Freeman denied Abdelfatah Ellawendy’s request to appeal without paying filing fees.
Abdelfatah Ellawendy, who sought permission to pursue an appeal without paying the filing fee.
What happened
In Ellawendy v. Monterey County Superior Court, Abdelfatah Ellawendy, a state parolee representing himself, had challenged the voluntariness of his 2019 plea agreement in a petition under a federal law governing state-court custody challenges. The court denied that petition on the merits on January 10, 2023.
Ellawendy then asked to appeal without paying the filing fee. The court had already denied permission to appeal because it found that no reasonable judge would find its decision on his constitutional claims debatable or wrong.
Because of that conclusion, Judge Beth Labson Freeman found that the appeal was not being taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the fee. The order terminated Docket No. 38.
The detailed version
- Ellawendy v. Monterey County Superior Court · No. 5:20-cv-02708
- Beth Freeman
- Feb. 7, 2023
Background
Abdelfatah Ellawendy, a state parolee proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the federal statute allowing a person in state custody to challenge certain state-court convictions or custody. He challenged the voluntariness of his 2019 plea agreement.
On January 10, 2023, the court denied the petition on the merits and entered judgment. The court also denied a Certificate of Appealability, which is required for many federal appeals involving state-court custody, because it concluded that no reasonable judge would find the court’s assessment of Ellawendy’s constitutional claims debatable or wrong.
Motion and ruling
Ellawendy filed a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis, meaning he asked to pursue the appeal without prepaying the filing fee. The court found that, for the same reason it had denied a Certificate of Appealability, the appeal was not taken in good faith.
The court denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. It stated that the order terminated Docket No. 38. This order addressed the fee-related appeal request, not the merits of the earlier habeas petition.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.