Crespo v. United States
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-05139
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Crespo v. United States, Judge McMahon dismissed Raymond Crespo’s petition without prejudice for failing to pay the filing fee or submit a fee-waiver request.
Raymond Crespo’s habeas petition was dismissed without prejudice after he failed to submit the required application to proceed without paying the filing fee or pay the $5 filing fee.
What happened
Crespo v. United States involved Raymond Crespo’s habeas petition in the Southern District of New York. The court had ordered him to submit a request to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the required $5 fee.
Crespo did neither within the required thirty days. The court therefore dismissed the petition without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon also denied a certificate of appealability and denied permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Crespo v. United States · No. 1:20-cv-05139
- Colleen McMahon
- Sept. 1, 2020
Background
Raymond Crespo filed a habeas petition against the United States. On July 7, 2020, the court ordered Crespo, within thirty days, either to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the $5 fee required to file a habeas petition.
Court’s ruling
Crespo did not submit the application or pay the fee. Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon therefore dismissed the petition without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The order does not address the underlying claims in the habeas petition.
The court also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because Crespo had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The court further certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. The Clerk was directed to mail Crespo a copy of the order and record service on the docket.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.