Emerson v. United States
- Laura Swain
- 1:21-cv-05647
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Emerson v. United States, Judge Swain transferred Emerson’s sentence challenge to Indiana because that court imposed the sentence.
Sherman Emerson’s sentence challenge was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Southern District of Indiana; the New York case was closed.
What happened
Sherman Emerson, who was incarcerated and representing himself, filed a motion challenging his sentence under a federal law allowing prisoners to seek sentence relief. He was convicted and sentenced in the federal court for the Southern District of Indiana.
The Southern District of New York transferred the action to the Southern District of Indiana under its local rule because that court imposed Emerson’s sentence. The order also directed the clerk to send Emerson a copy and closed the New York case.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the transfer and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denying Emerson permission to proceed without paying an appeal filing fee.
The detailed version
- Emerson v. United States · No. 1:21-cv-05647
- Laura Swain
- June 30, 2021
Background
Sherman Emerson, who was incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Otisville, New York, filed a motion without a lawyer under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. That law allows a federal prisoner to challenge the imposition of a sentence. Emerson sought to challenge a sentence imposed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.
Transfer
The Southern District of New York stated that, because Emerson was convicted and sentenced in the Southern District of Indiana, Local Civil Rule 83.1 required the action to be transferred there. The court directed its clerk to transfer the action to the Southern District of Indiana, mail Emerson a copy of the order, and note service on the docket.
Ruling and Effect
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the transfer and stated that the order closed the Southern District of New York case. The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The order did not decide whether Emerson’s sentence challenge was legally valid.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.