Stevens v. Walker
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-06545
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Mayo et al. v. S. Walker, Judge Swain severed ten petitioners’ claims and required Mayo to pay $5 or submit a fee-waiver application.
The 11 named petitioners were affected. Mayo remained the sole petitioner in this docket and had 30 days to pay the $5 filing fee or submit a fee-waiver application. The other 10 petitioners, including Mark Stevens, were ordered to proceed in separate newly opened habeas cases and would each later receive a filing-fee or fee-waiver directive.
What happened
In Maurice Mayo et al. v. S. Walker, 11 people held at the Robert N. Davoren Center on Rikers Island filed a self-represented petition challenging their criminal proceedings and confinement. They sought relief together for alleged violations involving grand-jury rights and superior-court informations.
The court ordered the claims of 10 petitioners—including Mark Stevens—separated into individual habeas cases because their circumstances and legal issues differed, and because handling the case jointly could cause delays, missed deadlines, and unfairness. Maurice Mayo remained the only petitioner in this case. The court also required Mayo within 30 days to pay the $5 filing fee or submit a completed application to proceed without paying it upfront.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain said no response was required yet and did not decide the petitioners’ underlying claims. She stated that failure by Mayo to meet the filing-fee requirement within 30 days would result in dismissal of this action, and she denied a certificate allowing an appeal because the petition made no substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied.
The detailed version
- Stevens v. Walker · No. 1:22-cv-06545
- Laura Swain
- July 29, 2022
Background
Maurice Mayo, William Harris, Randolph Maxwell, Jeffrey McVay, Cameron Walters, Clyde Reid, Jahsaun Washington, Rondell Halley, Mark Stevens, Shawn Scales, and Andrew Williams filed a self-represented petition for a writ of habeas corpus on their own behalf and on behalf of other Rikers Island prisoners. At filing, they were held in the Robert N. Davoren Center on Rikers Island. The petition alleged that New York City courts were improperly waiving their constitutional right to a grand jury, holding them on superior-court informations, and conspiring with district attorneys to violate their constitutional rights.
Severance of the Claims
The court applied Rules 20 and 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 20 concerns when multiple people may bring related claims together; Rule 21 allows a court to separate claims when joint litigation would not promote fairness or efficient case management.
The court concluded that the 11 petitioners’ claims should not proceed together. Although their allegations appeared similar at first glance, their criminal charges, underlying facts, procedural circumstances, and alleged constitutional violations were different. The court also explained that self-represented litigants may represent only themselves, that every unrepresented party would need to personally sign filings, and that incarceration could make communication and coordinated litigation difficult. Joint litigation therefore could lead to piecemeal filings, delays, and missed deadlines.
The court ordered the case divided into 11 separate habeas cases. Mayo remained the sole petitioner in this action. The claims of Harris, Maxwell, McVay, Walters, Reid, Washington, Halley, Stevens, Scales, and Williams were to be opened as 10 separate actions with new docket numbers. The court directed that a copy of the petition and order be filed in each new action. It also stated that the separate actions could potentially be treated as related or consolidated later if appropriate, but the 10 petitioners would not be treated as co-petitioners unless the court later ordered otherwise.
Filing Fee for Mayo
A habeas petitioner must either pay the $5 filing fee or submit a completed, signed application to proceed without prepaying court fees. The petition requested fee-waiver status but did not show that the petitioners could not pay the fee.
The court gave Mayo 30 days from the date of the order to pay the $5 fee or submit the required application under docket number 1:22-CV-5810 (LTS). If the court approved the application, Mayo could proceed without prepaying the fee. No response from S. Walker was required at that time. If Mayo did not comply within 30 days, the court stated that it would dismiss this action.
Disposition
The court severed the claims of the 10 listed petitioners, directed the Clerk of Court to open 10 new habeas actions, and required Mayo to pay the filing fee or submit the fee-waiver application within 30 days. The court did not reach the merits of the petitioners’ constitutional or confinement-related allegations. It also stated that a certificate of appealability would not issue because the petition made no substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.