Johnson v. Bonta

Background

Lamar Johnson filed a habeas petition, meaning a request for court review of the legality of his custody or restrictions on his liberty. He seeks review of a June 2021 order that denied his request to be immediately released into the community as a transient or, alternatively, granted unconditional discharge. The state supreme court denied his appeal in September 2022. Johnson filed this federal petition in December 2023.

Johnson was later conditionally released into the community, but the state continued imposing substantial restrictions and refused to grant unconditional release. Johnson argues that the delay in releasing him means due process now requires unconditional release.

Timeliness

The government moved to dismiss the petition as untimely under the one-year statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). It argued that the limitations period began when the state supreme court denied Johnson’s appeal on September 28, 2022, which would make the December 2023 filing two months late.

The court rejected that argument. The period for seeking review by the United States Supreme Court is included in the tolling period. Because Johnson had 90 days from September 28, 2022, to seek Supreme Court review, the one-year clock did not begin until December 28, 2022. The court therefore concluded that the petition was timely.

The government also argued that the June 2021 order could not be used to calculate the limitations period because it was not the judgment under which Johnson was being held. The court disagreed, reasoning that Johnson was challenging the delay in his conditional release and that the June 2021 order kept him in custody by denying immediate release as a transient.

Mootness

The government argued that the petition was moot because Johnson had been conditionally released nearly two years before filing it. A claim is moot when the court can no longer provide meaningful relief.

The court rejected that argument as well. Johnson is not seeking conditional release; he is seeking removal of the conditions. Because the state continues to impose substantial restrictions on his liberty and refuses unconditional release, the court held that his claim is not moot. The court expressly stated that it was far from clear whether Johnson would ultimately be entitled to unconditional release on the merits.

Disposition and Next Steps

Judge Vince Chhabria denied the government’s motion to dismiss the habeas petition. The ruling addressed timeliness and mootness, not whether Johnson is entitled to unconditional release. The government must file an answer within 21 days, any reply from Johnson is due 21 days after the answer, and the court set a hearing for September 5, 2024, at 10:00 a.m.