Triplett v. Reardon
- Laura Swain
- 1:20-cv-01064
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Triplett v. Reardon, Judge McMahon granted Triplett 30 more days to explain why his detention petition should not be rejected as late.
The order directly affects Omar (AKA Naftali) Triplett by extending his deadline and setting conditions for further consideration of his petition. It also postpones P. Reardon’s response and delays a ruling on Triplett’s request for appointed counsel.
What happened
In Triplett v. Reardon, Omar (AKA Naftali) Triplett asked the court to consider his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a petition challenging custody. The court had ordered him to explain why the petition should not be rejected as filed too late.
After receiving Triplett’s request for more time, the court granted a 30-day extension. It said that if he did not meet the extended deadline and could not show a valid reason for the failure, the court would deny the petition as time-barred. The court did not require P. Reardon to respond yet and postponed ruling on Triplett’s request for appointed counsel.
Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue because Triplett had not made the required substantial showing of a constitutional-right violation. The court further denied permission to appeal without paying court fees, stating that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Triplett v. Reardon · No. 1:20-cv-01064
- Laura Swain
- May 28, 2020
Background
Omar (AKA Naftali) Triplett is the petitioner, and P. Reardon is the respondent. Triplett filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a legal action challenging custody. In an order dated March 23, 2020, the court directed Triplett to submit a declaration explaining why the court should not deny the petition as time-barred, meaning filed after the applicable deadline.
On May 26, 2020, the court received Triplett’s request for additional time to comply with the March 23 order.
Rulings
The court granted Triplett a 30-day extension. It required him to submit the declaration within 30 days after the date of the May 28 order. The court stated that if Triplett failed to meet the extended deadline and could not show good cause—an adequate reason—for that failure, the court would deny the petition as time-barred.
The court stated that no answer from Reardon was required at that stage. It also deferred ruling on Triplett’s application for appointment of counsel until after Triplett filed a declaration complying with the March 23 order.
Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon determined that Triplett had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied, so a certificate of appealability would not issue. A certificate of appealability is court authorization required for an appeal in this type of proceeding. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order directed the Clerk of Court to mail Triplett a copy and record service on the docket.
Classification Basis
This was a procedural order. The court extended a deadline and addressed appeal-related matters but did not decide the underlying habeas petition or determine whether it was actually time-barred.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.