Smith v. The People of The State of New York
- Lewis Liman
- 1:20-cv-09708
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Osmon[d]o Smith v. The People, Judge Liman granted an amendment adding an ineffective-assistance claim to Smith’s pending state-custody petition.
Osmon[d]o Smith may pursue the added ineffective-assistance ground in his pending petition. The People of the State of New York must file a supplemental response, and the Clerk must adjust access to Smith’s letter as ordered.
What happened
In Osmon[d]o Smith v. The People of the State of New York, Smith sent the court a letter asking to add ineffective assistance of counsel as a new ground in his pending petition challenging his state-court custody. Parts of the letter contained personal medical information and were initially restricted from public view.
The court treated Smith’s request as a request to amend his petition and granted it. The court ordered the state to file a supplemental response by December 3, 2021, and allowed Smith to file a reply. The court also ordered that the first five pages of the letter be filed publicly, while the complete letter would be available to the state, Smith, and court personnel.
Judge Lewis J. Liman issued this procedural order without deciding whether Smith’s ineffective-assistance claim has merit. The opinion states that Smith’s reply was due before January 14, 2021, a date that appears inconsistent with the November 4, 2021 order.
The detailed version
- Smith v. The People of The State of New York · No. 1:20-cv-09708
- Lewis Liman
- Nov. 4, 2021
Background
The court received a letter from Petitioner Smith, docketed as Dkt. No. 9 and dated December 29, 2020. The Clerk had entered the letter as court-view only because parts of it contained personal information, including personal medical information. The letter also asserted an additional ground of ineffective assistance of counsel for Smith’s amended petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which seeks a writ of habeas corpus, and asked that the new ground be incorporated by reference.
Ruling
The court determined that the first five pages of the twelve-page letter stated the additional ground and did not contain personal information. It ordered that those pages be filed unsealed on the docket. The full twelve-page letter was to be made available to the respondent, Smith, and court personnel.
The court construed Smith’s request to incorporate the new ground as a request to amend his pending petition and granted the request. It ordered the respondent to file a supplemental response addressing the additional ground by December 3, 2021. Smith was permitted to file a reply before January 14, 2021. The Clerk was directed to change the letter’s viewing level to “Selected Parties” and to mail Smith a copy of the order.
Effect of the Order
This order allowed Smith to add the ineffective-assistance ground and set deadlines for further filings. It did not decide whether that ground is legally or factually valid, and it did not resolve Smith’s underlying petition. The stated January 14, 2021 reply deadline appears inconsistent with the November 4, 2021 date of the order; the opinion does not explain the discrepancy.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.