Mojica v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-05608
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mojica v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Judge Swain denied Jesus Mojica’s petition without prejudice because it duplicated a pending petition.
Jesus Mojica’s § 2241 petition was denied without prejudice because it duplicated his pending related petition. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal.
What happened
In Mojica v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Jesus Mojica, who was representing himself, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He asserted the same claims as in an earlier petition that was still pending in the same court.
The court found that the new petition was substantially similar to the earlier case and that litigating both cases would serve no useful purpose. It therefore denied the new petition without prejudice as duplicative of the pending action, docket number 1:22-CV-5526 (LTS).
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue because the petition did not make a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. She further certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Mojica v. Federal Bureau of Prisons · No. 1:22-cv-05608
- Laura Swain
- July 14, 2022
Background
Jesus Mojica, appearing without a lawyer, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The opinion states that he had previously filed a substantially similar petition asserting the same claims for habeas relief. That earlier action remained pending under docket number 1:22-CV-5526 (LTS).
Reasoning
The court determined that the present petition raised the same claims as the pending action. Because of that duplication, the court concluded that no useful purpose would be served by litigating the present case.
Ruling
The court denied the present petition without prejudice as duplicative of the pending action. “Without prejudice” means the order did not bar the petition from being brought again, although the opinion does not address the merits of Mojica’s claims.
The court also stated that a certificate of appealability would not issue because the petition made no substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. In addition, the court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.