McFadden v. Cuomo

Background

Reginald Ghaffar McFadden, who was incarcerated at Attica Correctional Facility, brought the action without a lawyer. He challenged his 1995 conviction and subsequent challenges to that conviction, alleging prosecutorial misconduct and seeking a new trial. He also asked to proceed without prepaying the filing fees, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis, or IFP.

Legal standard

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner generally may not proceed IFP if, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated or detained, the prisoner brought an action or appeal that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim. The exception applies when the prisoner is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court relied on earlier orders stating that McFadden was barred from filing new actions IFP. It also explained that imminent danger must exist when the complaint is filed.

Ruling

The court determined that McFadden’s complaint did not show imminent danger of serious physical injury. It therefore denied his request to proceed IFP and dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule. The court stated that McFadden could commence a new action by paying the filing fees, after which the complaint would be reviewed under the prisoner-screening statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. It stated that McFadden remained barred from filing future actions IFP while in custody unless he faced an imminent threat of serious physical injury.