Jones v. McCormack
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-10522
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jones v. McCormack, Judge Swain denied Rafael Arden Jones’s petition without prejudice because he had not obtained required permission to file it.
Rafael Arden Jones, whose federal petition challenging his ongoing criminal proceedings was denied without prejudice because he did not obtain the required permission to file.
What happened
In Jones v. McCormack, Rafael Arden Jones, representing himself, filed a federal petition challenging ongoing criminal proceedings in the Bronx Supreme Criminal Court.
The court had previously required Jones to obtain permission before filing future petitions of this kind without prepaying filing fees. Because he did not seek that permission, the court denied this petition without prejudice.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also declined to issue special permission to appeal and denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Jones v. McCormack · No. 1:23-cv-10522
- Laura Swain
- Dec. 8, 2023
Background
Rafael Arden Jones filed this petition without a lawyer under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal law allowing certain challenges to custody or related proceedings. He challenged ongoing criminal proceedings under indictment number 70616-21 in the Bronx Supreme Criminal Court. The petition concerned proceedings arising from a 2021 arrest.
Prior Filing Restriction
The court stated that, in a November 6, 2023 order and judgment in a prior related proceeding, No. 23-CV-8296 (S.D.N.Y.), it had barred Jones from filing future § 2241 petitions in that court challenging the ongoing criminal proceedings arising from the 2021 arrest without first obtaining leave to file. The restriction applied when he sought to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The court said the restriction was based on his continuous submission of frivolous petitions.
Ruling
Because Jones did not seek leave before filing this new petition, the court denied the petition without prejudice under the earlier filing restriction. The court therefore did not reach the substance of his challenge to the ongoing criminal proceedings.
The court also determined that the petition made no substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied, so a certificate of appealability—a form of court permission required for certain appeals—would not issue. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.