Confusing Legalese.
[Editor] This is a letter I recently received from Pete with a copy of some legal documents. All names, places, dates, and numbers have been changed to protect the innocent and the guilty. It doesn't make much sense to me, but I am not a lawyer. Neither is Pete, and apparently even the court is confused about their own procedures. If there is a lesson in all this, I suppose it is to behave yourself so that you don't get tangled in the sticky web that is our justice system.
I received your letter today. THANK YOU. It was good to hear from you. I will respond to your letter tomorrow, as this letter is a simple request for your assistance in my never ending search for justice.
I do not know if you have been keeping track of some of the hoops I have jumped through in the last year, but as you might be able to tell from the enclosed court document I am now being told to go back to the start. Strange.
According to my understanding of the law they cite, the missing paperwork was supposed to be issued by the court automatically when I originally filed the notice of appeal over a year ago!
If the second highest court system in this country (U.S. Supreme Court being the highest) can not figure out what is going on, how am I supposed to know what needs to be done? Of course the good news in this I am not dead yet. Hope is still springing eternally.
Would you be kind enough to Xerox two copies of the enclosed court order and send one copy to the court with the enclosed letter, and keep one copy in the archives? Please return the original to me when you send me your next letter. I'm asking because in order to get one copy of this page it would take me over a week of waiting.
Thanks for your help. I have enclosed an envelope for you to mail to the court.
---------------------------------------------------------------
To: Clerk of the U.S. District Court
Re: Prison Pete v. Attorney General State of New York
Docket Number: 08-qjc-59 - Certificate of Appealability
To whom it may concern:
Enclosed please find an order from the U.S. Court of Appeals stating the need for the District Court to issue a Certificate of Appealability as stated in FRAP Rule 16(c) and Circuit Rule 27b.
According to the way I understand the above rules, the district court judge was supposed to rule on the Certificate of Appealability at the time the Notice of Appeal was filed. Since this was not done, I am respectfully asking that the district court judge rule on the issue at this time.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Date: 4/14/06
Docket Number: 27-gkrw-163
Short Title: Prison Pete v. Attorney General State of New York
DC Docket Number: 08-qjc-59
DC Judge: Honorable Seymour Johnson
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals, held at the United States Courthouse, on the 14th day of April, two thousand and six.
Prison Pete,
Petitioner-Appellant,
V.
Attorney General of New York,
Respondent-Appellee.
A notice of appeal having been filed from an order denying relief in a application brought under the provisions of 17 U.S.C. Section 1361, and it appearing that the file of the proceedings does not contain either a certificate of appealability or a denial thereof, it is
ORDERED that said appeal be, and it hereby is
DISMISSED without prejudice to the appeal being reinstated upon notice to the Clerk within 30 days from the entry of an order by the district judge granted or denying a certificate of appealability. Any motions pending prior to the entry of this order of dismissal are deemed
MOOT.
In accordance with Rule 16(c) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and Circuit Rule 27b, you are hereby directed to promptly move for a certificate of appealability in the district court.
For the Court,
Bernice E. Fitzgerald, Clerk
----------------------------------
By: Virginia Roberts
Deputy Clerk
