Williams v. Justices of NYS Sup. Ct.

Background

Jomo Williams, appearing without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his November 26, 2013 conviction in New York Supreme Court, New York County. The court previously gave him time to show that he met the requirement that a habeas petitioner be “in custody”—meaning subject to substantial restraints resulting from the conviction that are not shared by the general public—and to show that he had used available state-court remedies. After receiving a declaration that did not address the custody issue, the court dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction on September 24, 2019.

Williams then moved for reconsideration under Rules 59 and 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court treated the filing as a motion under Rule 59(e), Local Civil Rule 6.3, and Rule 60(b).

Reasoning

The court held that the Rule 59(e) and Local Civil Rule 6.3 deadlines had expired before Williams filed his motion. It also held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(2) did not allow the court to extend those deadlines, including for excusable neglect.

The court separately considered the request under Rule 60(b), which permits relief from a judgment for specified reasons, including mistake, newly discovered evidence, misconduct, a void judgment, satisfaction of the judgment, or another reason justifying relief. Williams asserted that he continued to suffer consequences from the allegedly unlawful conviction. He cited the Social Security Administration’s use of the conviction in evaluating his application to act as the legal guardian for his mother, who was a Social Security beneficiary. He also asserted that the conviction could be used to increase future criminal sentences and that state courts had hindered his efforts to seek relief.

Because Williams’s submissions left it unclear whether he remained exposed to future adverse consequences at the discretion of a supervising court or other authority, the court reopened the matter as a precaution. The opinion did not decide the underlying validity of Williams’s conviction or whether he ultimately satisfied the custody requirement.

Ruling

Judge Colleen McMahon granted Williams’s motion for reconsideration under Rule 60(b). The Clerk of Court was directed to vacate the September 24, 2019 order and judgment and reopen the action for further proceedings. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.