Azeez v. John/Jane Doe
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:22-cv-06028
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Azeez v. Lilly, Judge McCarthy ordered more briefing before further action on Azeez’s pending federal habeas petition.
Abdool Azeez and Superintendent Lynn Lilly; the order primarily required Respondent to provide additional briefing and allowed Azeez to reply.
What happened
In Azeez v. Superintendent Lynn Lilly, Abdool Azeez has a pending petition asking the federal court to review his case. The respondent opposed the petition on November 21, 2023.
The court said it needed more information before a magistrate judge could issue a recommended decision. It ordered the respondent to address how Azeez’s two state petitions affect the federal filing deadline, whether those petitions were properly filed, and whether the deadline was paused during part of his state proceedings. Azeez may respond by May 13, 2024.
Judge Judith C. McCarthy issued the order on April 1, 2024. The order did not decide whether Azeez’s petition should be granted or denied.
The detailed version
- Azeez v. John/Jane Doe · No. 7:22-cv-06028
- Kenneth Karas
- Apr. 1, 2024
Background
Abdool Azeez filed a federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Respondent Superintendent Lynn Lilly, through the District Attorney of Westchester County, New York, filed a response opposing the petition on November 21, 2023. The petition remained pending.
The court reviewed the parties’ submissions and determined that it needed additional information before a Report and Recommendation could be issued. A Report and Recommendation is a magistrate judge’s proposed decision for review by the district court.
Order
The court directed Respondent to file a supplemental brief by April 15, 2024, addressing three issues:
- What effect, if any, Azeez’s first and second state habeas petitions have on the federal statute of limitations under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, or AEDPA.
- Whether those state petitions qualify as a “properly filed application” under Smalls v. Smith and related cases.
- Whether the federal limitations period was paused from August 26, 2021, when Azeez’s direct appeal concluded, through November 18, 2021, when the Court of Appeals denied his request for leave to appeal the denial of his second state habeas petition.
The court stated that Azeez could respond to Respondent’s supplemental brief by May 13, 2024. It also directed the Clerk to mail Azeez a copy of the order and noted that he could request copies of cited unpublished authorities from Respondent’s counsel if he did not have access to them.
Disposition and Effect
The court ordered supplemental briefing; it did not grant or deny the habeas petition and did not resolve the statute-of-limitations issues. The order therefore required additional information before the case could proceed to a recommended decision.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.