Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 9, 2024

Murillo-Cabezas v. F.C.I. Otisville Warden

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:23-cv-11329
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
HabeasPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Murillo-Cabezas v. Warden, Judge Swain ordered payment of the filing fee or submission of an application to proceed without prepaying it.

Who this affects

The order affects Luis Fernando Murillo-Cabezas by requiring him to pay the $5 filing fee or submit an IFP application within 30 days; failure to comply would result in dismissal of the action.

What happened

Luis Fernando Murillo-Cabezas filed a petition identified by the court as a habeas petition against the F.C.I. Otisville Warden. He was proceeding without a lawyer and had not submitted either the required $5 filing fee or an application to proceed without prepaying fees.

The court gave Murillo-Cabezas 30 days from January 9, 2024, to pay the fee or submit a signed application. The court said no summons would be issued at that time and that the case would be processed if he complied. It also said the action would be dismissed if he did not comply within the deadline.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the payment-or-application requirement and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide the petition’s underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Murillo-Cabezas v. F.C.I. Otisville Warden · No. 1:23-cv-11329
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Jan. 9, 2024

Background

Luis Fernando Murillo-Cabezas filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against the F.C.I. Otisville Warden. The opinion states that he was proceeding without a lawyer. When he filed the petition, he did not pay the $5 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.

Order

The court directed Murillo-Cabezas, within 30 days of the order, to do one of two things: pay the $5 filing fee or complete and submit the attached IFP application. The court instructed him to identify the application with docket number 23-CV-11329 (LTS). The court explained that, if it granted the application, he could proceed without paying the fees in advance.

The court ordered that no summons be issued at that time. It stated that, if Murillo-Cabezas complied with the order, the case would be processed under the procedures of the Clerk’s Office. If he failed to comply within the allowed time, the action would be dismissed.

Disposition

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered payment of the filing fee or submission of an IFP application. The court also certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not reach the merits of the habeas petition.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.