Chrichlow v. Sipple

Background

On August 18, 2020, the court received a declaration from Kevin Damion Crichlow seeking three forms of relief: a preliminary injunction directing his transfer to Sing Sing or Downstate Correctional Facility, appointment of pro bono counsel, and discovery. After receiving a response from the New York State Office of the Attorney General on behalf of the defendants, the court issued an earlier written order denying the requested relief without prejudice to renewing the requests later.

Later filing

The court later received another declaration from Crichlow, dated September 22, 2020, focusing on an injunction ordering his transfer and on discovery. The court construed that filing as an amendment to the earlier declaration. The defendants responded on October 16, 2020. The court stated that, despite the additional information, the application still had the same deficiencies identified in the earlier order.

Ruling

Judge Philip M. Halpern denied Crichlow’s application for a preliminary injunction and discovery without prejudice to applying for that relief again later. The order does not separately rule on the request for appointment of pro bono counsel in its final disposition, although the court’s earlier order had denied the relief sought without prejudice. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status for that purpose. The Clerk was directed to mail a copy of the order to Crichlow.