Simpson v. Keyser

Background

Theodore Simpson, incarcerated at Sullivan Correctional Facility and proceeding without a lawyer, filed a “Notice of Motion for Judicial Intervention.” He sought immediate release to house-arrest status based on alleged failures by prison officials to control COVID-19. He also appeared to challenge the imposition of at least one Bronx County sentence and asserted that he had been wrongfully convicted.

Simpson stated that he had filed a state-court petition concerning his immediate confinement in New York Supreme Court, Sullivan County. He said that proceeding had been converted from a state custody proceeding under Article 70 to a proceeding under Article 78, but he did not describe its status, any decisions, or any appeals. He also did not identify the convictions he was challenging.

Court’s analysis

The court construed the filing as seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the federal statute allowing a state prisoner to challenge custody based on a violation of federal law. The court explained that a challenge to the imposition or execution of a state sentence generally proceeds under that statute.

The court determined that Simpson had previously brought federal petitions challenging the imposition of Bronx County sentences and that those petitions had been denied on the merits. If Simpson was again challenging sentences addressed in those earlier petitions, the new claims could qualify as “second or successive” petitions. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), a second or successive petition requires authorization from the appropriate federal appeals court before it may be filed in a federal district court.

Because Simpson had not identified which convictions he was challenging and was proceeding without a lawyer, the court directed him to show cause within 60 days why the sentence-related claims should not be transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as second or successive.

The court treated Simpson’s remaining claims, including his request for relief from immediate custody, as additional § 2254 claims. It gave him 60 days either to notify the court in writing that he wished to withdraw those claims or to file an amended petition. The amended petition must identify each ground for relief, provide supporting facts and legal theories, state the requested relief, and address whether Simpson had exhausted available state-court remedies or had a reason that exhaustion should be excused.

Ruling and effect

Judge Nathan did not transfer the claims, deny the petition, or decide whether Simpson was entitled to release or relief from his sentences at that stage. The court directed Simpson to show cause regarding a possible transfer, granted him leave to withdraw the remaining claims, and granted him leave to file an amended petition within 60 days. The court stated that an amended petition would replace the original filing. If Simpson failed to comply and could not show good cause for the failure, the court would deny his federal custody claims without prejudice.

The court also stated that no certificate of appealability would issue because Simpson had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal.