Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 27, 2020

Bates v. New York Parole

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-03986
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Bates v. New York Parole, Judge McMahon dismissed Richard Lee Bates Jr.’s habeas petition without prejudice because he neither paid the fee nor filed an IFP application.

Who this affects

Richard Lee Bates Jr.; his habeas petition was dismissed without prejudice, and the court denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.

What happened

In Bates v. New York Parole, Richard Lee Bates Jr. filed a petition asking the federal court to review his detention through a habeas case.

The court had ordered Bates to either pay the required $5 filing fee or submit a request to proceed without paying it. Bates did neither, although the court received two letters from him about the petition’s merits.

Judge McMahon dismissed the petition without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. The court also said no certificate allowing an appeal would issue and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Bates v. New York Parole · No. 1:20-cv-03986
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
July 27, 2020

Background

Richard Lee Bates Jr. filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a court action seeking review of allegedly unlawful custody or detention. On May 27, 2020, the court ordered Bates to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the $5 filing fee. The order warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal.

The opinion states that Bates did not submit the application or pay the fee. It also states that the court received two letters from him concerning the merits of his petition and that the letters’ return addresses indicated he remained incarcerated in the same facility.

Ruling

The court dismissed the petition without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The opinion does not decide the merits of Bates’s habeas claims.

The court further stated that no certificate of appealability—a document required for an appeal in this type of case—would issue because the petition made no substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Bates permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal. Judge Colleen McMahon directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to Bates and record service on the docket.

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.