Hopkins v. United States
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:23-cv-10667
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Hopkins v. United States, Judge Kaplan ordered Arius Hopkins to submit a signed sentence-challenge motion within 30 days or face dismissal.
Arius Hopkins and the United States. Hopkins must provide an original signature within 30 days for the case to proceed; otherwise, the action will be dismissed.
What happened
In Hopkins v. United States, Arius Hopkins, who was representing himself, filed a motion asking the court to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The motion did not include his signature.
The court ordered Hopkins to send an original signed signature page within 30 days. The court did not require the United States to respond yet. If Hopkins complies, the case will proceed; if he does not, the action will be dismissed.
Judge Kaplan also ruled that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Hopkins permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order did not decide whether Hopkins’s sentence should be changed.
The detailed version
- Hopkins v. United States · No. 1:23-cv-10667
- Lewis Kaplan
- Dec. 11, 2023
Background
Arius Hopkins, appearing without a lawyer, filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 asking the court to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The motion also requested a hearing, appointment of a new lawyer, and any other relief available. The court found that Hopkins had submitted the motion without a signature.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) and Local Civil Rule 11.1(a) require an unrepresented party to sign a written motion. The court cited the Supreme Court’s explanation that the signature must be handwritten or otherwise physically placed on the document.
Order
The court directed Hopkins to resubmit the motion’s signature page with an original signature within 30 days of December 11, 2023. The court stated that no answer from the United States was required at that time. If Hopkins complies, the case will proceed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If he does not comply within the allowed time, the action will be dismissed.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The court did not address the merits of Hopkins’s sentence challenge, decide whether his sentence should be vacated or corrected, rule on his request for a hearing, or decide whether to appoint a new lawyer.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addressed the filing’s missing signature and required a correction before the case could proceed. Judge Lewis A. Kaplan did not decide the underlying sentence challenge.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.