Williams v. United States
- Richard Sullivan
- 1:23-cv-08300
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Williams v. United States, Judge Sullivan granted Williams’s voluntary dismissal and directed the Clerk to close the case.
John T. Williams’s post-conviction challenge was voluntarily dismissed, and the action was closed. The United States did not file an answer or other response before the dismissal.
What happened
In Williams v. United States, John T. Williams, representing himself, challenged his federal conviction and fully served sentence. The Western District of New York treated his filing as a petition seeking to set aside his sentence and transferred it to the Southern District of New York.
Before the court acted, Williams filed a notice voluntarily withdrawing the case. Because the United States had not filed an answer or another response, the court ruled that Williams could voluntarily dismiss the action under the applicable federal rule.
Judge Richard J. Sullivan granted the voluntary dismissal and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The court also said an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Williams v. United States · No. 1:23-cv-08300
- Richard Sullivan
- Jan. 4, 2024
Background
John T. Williams, appearing without a lawyer, filed this action challenging his conviction and fully served sentence. He styled his filing as a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4), which concerns judgments claimed to be legally void. The Western District of New York construed the filing as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a procedure for a federal prisoner to challenge a conviction or sentence, and transferred the action to the Southern District of New York.
Voluntary dismissal
Before the court took action, Williams filed a notice of voluntary withdrawal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). That rule allows a plaintiff or petitioner to dismiss an action without a court order before the opposing party serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment. The court found that the United States had filed neither an answer nor another response to Williams’s petition.
Ruling
The court ruled that Williams was entitled to voluntarily dismiss the action under Rule 41(a)(1)(A). It therefore directed the Clerk of Court to close the action. The court did not decide the validity of Williams’s conviction, sentence, or jurisdictional arguments. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.