Bates v. New York Parole

Background

Richard Lee Bates, Jr., a person in New York parole custody, filed the action without a lawyer using a New York state habeas form. The court had previously granted his request to proceed without paying filing fees. The submission included allegations that he was innocent of a 2014 burglary, was being illegally detained, and should be released from the Auburn Correctional Facility. He also sought to overturn a parole-violation term, transfer his parole supervision to Tulsa, Oklahoma, receive transportation and money, and have certain officials removed from their positions.

The court noted that New York records showed Bates’s conviction had been affirmed by the Appellate Division, First Department, and that the New York Court of Appeals had denied leave to appeal. The opinion states that Bates did not appear to be challenging his conviction, but instead appeared to be challenging his parole conditions. The record did not show that he had exhausted a challenge to those conditions in the New York courts.

Claims for Money Damages

The court construed requests for plane tickets and money as claims for money damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court relied on an earlier order barring Bates from filing a new federal civil action without paying filing fees while incarcerated unless he first obtained permission from the court. That restriction applied because of the federal statute commonly called the “three-strikes” rule, which generally prevents a prisoner with three qualifying prior dismissals from proceeding without paying filing fees unless he faces an immediate danger of serious physical injury.

The court found that Bates’s petition did not show such an immediate danger. It therefore dismissed the money-damages claims without prejudice. The opinion expressly states that habeas petitions and appeals are not civil actions for purposes of that filing-fee restriction, so the restriction did not bar Bates’s custody-related habeas claims.

Habeas Claims and Parole Conditions

The court construed the remaining claims as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which permits a state prisoner to seek federal relief on the ground that custody violates the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties. Under Rule 2(c) of the rules governing those petitions, a petitioner must identify each ground for relief, provide the supporting facts, and state the requested relief.

The court found that Bates’s submission did not meet those requirements. It did not identify the conviction or sentence being challenged, specify the grounds for relief, or provide facts and a legal theory that would allow the court or a respondent to understand and address the claims. The court also explained that a state prisoner generally must first present constitutional claims through the available state appellate process. The opinion states that Bates had not shown exhaustion of any challenge to his parole conditions.

The court further stated that, to the extent Bates sought federal review of a parole decision denying transfer of supervision to Oklahoma, such a decision was not reviewable through a federal custody petition under the authority cited in the opinion. It also stated that there is no constitutional right to release on parole or to be free from parole conditions, and that parole conditions are generally matters for state-court review unless parole officials acted arbitrarily and capriciously.

Order to Amend and Disposition

The court granted Bates leave to file an amended petition within sixty days of the order. The amended petition had to identify the grounds for relief and describe the steps taken to fully pursue those grounds in New York courts. The court warned that an amended petition would replace the original petition and had to use the same docket number and be labeled an amended petition.

The court directed the Clerk to mail the order to addresses listed for Bates and to record service. It stated that the amended petition would be reviewed for substantive sufficiency and, if proper, the case would be reassigned under the Clerk’s procedures. If Bates failed to comply within the permitted time and could not show good cause, the petition would be denied. The order did not decide the merits of whether Bates was entitled to release or other habeas relief.