Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 5, 2022

Walters v. Walker

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-06551
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Walters v. Walker: Judge Swain dismissed Cameron Walters’s habeas case without prejudice because he neither paid the fee nor filed an IFP request.

Who this affects

Cameron Walters’s habeas action was dismissed without prejudice; the court also denied a certificate of appealability and permission to appeal without paying the appeal fee.

What happened

In Walters v. Walker, Cameron Walters filed a petition challenging his detention through a habeas case. The court ordered him to either pay the $5 filing fee or submit a request to proceed without paying it.

Walters did neither within the required 30 days. The court therefore dismissed the case without prejudice. The opinion does not address the underlying claims in the petition.

Judge Swain also ruled that Walters would not receive a certificate of appealability and denied permission to appeal without paying the appeal fee. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Walters v. Walker · No. 1:22-cv-06551
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 5, 2022

Background

Cameron Walters filed a habeas petition, a request for court review of his detention. On August 3, 2022, the court ordered Walters to submit a completed request to proceed without paying the filing fee, called an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), or to pay the $5 fee required for a habeas action. The order gave him 30 days and warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal.

Court’s Ruling

Walters did not submit an IFP application and did not pay the fee. The court therefore dismissed the action without prejudice. The opinion did not decide the underlying habeas claims.

Appeal-Related Rulings and Judgment

The court determined that the petition did not make a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied, so it ordered that no certificate of appealability would issue. A certificate of appealability is a document required for certain appeals from habeas decisions. The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.