Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 4, 2019

Shelton v. FCI Otisville, Bureau of Prisons

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:19-cv-09116
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Shelton v. FCI Otisville, Judge McMahon dismissed the petition without prejudice because Shelton neither paid the filing fee nor submitted an application to proceed without paying.

Who this affects

Joseph K. Shelton's petition was dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying it. The respondents were not required to litigate the petition's underlying claims.

What happened

In Shelton v. FCI Otisville, Bureau of Prisons, Joseph K. Shelton filed a petition asking the court to review his custody. The court had ordered him to either pay the $5 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying it.

Shelton did neither within the required thirty days. The court therefore dismissed the petition without prejudice. The opinion does not address the underlying claims in the petition.

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees because the appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Shelton v. FCI Otisville, Bureau of Prisons · No. 1:19-cv-09116
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Dec. 4, 2019

Background

Joseph K. Shelton filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a court petition seeking review of custody or detention. In an order dated October 16, 2019, the court directed Shelton, within thirty days, to either pay the required $5 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying the fee, commonly called an application to proceed in forma pauperis.

Reason for dismissal

The court stated that Shelton had not submitted the application or paid the filing fee. Because he failed to comply with the earlier order, the court dismissed the petition without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The opinion does not reach the merits of the petition's claims.

Appeal-related rulings

Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon stated that the petition made no substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied, so a certificate of appealability would not issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.