Serrano v. Superintendent
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-06320
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Carlos Serrano v. Superintendent, Judge McMahon administratively closed the action without prejudice because Serrano filed a habeas petition in a separate case.
Carlos Serrano; the order administratively closed his action without prejudice and denied fee-free status for any appeal from the order.
What happened
Carlos Serrano, who was representing himself, sent the court a letter asking for one more year to file a petition challenging his conviction. The court opened the letter as a new civil case.
Serrano later filed a habeas petition and an application to proceed without paying court fees in a separate case. Because that petition was filed elsewhere, the court found no useful reason to continue the first case and directed the Clerk to administratively close it without prejudice.
Judge Colleen McMahon also stated that the court could not grant the requested extension because no petition had been filed in this action. The court said no certificate of appealability would issue and denied fee-free status for any appeal from the order.
The detailed version
- Serrano v. Superintendent · No. 1:20-cv-06320
- Colleen McMahon
- Aug. 26, 2020
Background
Carlos Serrano, appearing without a lawyer, sent the court a letter seeking a one-year extension of time to file a federal petition challenging his conviction. The letter was received on August 11, 2020, and opened as this civil action, referred to in the opinion as the earlier case. On August 18, 2020, Serrano submitted a partially completed petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, an application to proceed without paying the filing fee, and another request for an extension in a separate case, Serrano v. Royce, No. 20-CV-6660.
Court’s action
The court directed the Clerk to administratively close this action, without prejudice to Serrano’s litigation of the separate § 2254 case. Administrative closure ended the case’s active processing but, as stated by the court, did not bar Serrano from litigating the separate case. The court explained that it lacked jurisdiction—the legal authority to decide the request—to grant an extension because no habeas petition had been filed in this action.
The order also states that the current petition made no substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right, so a certificate of appealability would not issue. A certificate of appealability is required for certain federal habeas appeals. The court further certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees.
Disposition
Judge Colleen McMahon ordered administrative closure of the action without prejudice. The opinion does not grant the requested extension of time.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.