United States District Court, S.D. New York
Hector Morel, pro se, New
York, NY, For the Petitioner.
Rebecca S. Tinio, Assistant
United States Attorney Southern District of New York, New York, New York, for
OPINION & ORDER
DENISE COTE, District Judge.
Hector Morel ("Morel") filed a petition for habeas corpus in this Court, seeking vacatur of an 88 month revocation of supervised release by the United States Parole Commission ("Commission"). This action was stayed pending duplicative litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia ("Virginia Court"). Following the lifting of that stay, the Commission moved to dismiss the petition under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P. For the following reasons, the motion is granted.
Much of the relevant background is summarized by the Honorable Jackson L. Kiser, of the Virginia Court, in his July 2, 2013 decision. Morel v. Zych, No. 12-cv-00423, 2013 WL 3336751 (W.D. Va. July 2, 2013) ("Virginia Decision"). The procedural history in the Virginia Decision "is not subject to reasonable dispute, " Fed.R.Ev. 201, and thus can be considered by judicial notice. See, e.g., Kramer v. Time Warner, Inc. , 937 F.2d 767, 774 (2d Cir. 1991).
Morel was convicted for distributing cocaine, in violation of the laws of the District of Columbia ("First D.C. Conviction"). On April 20, 2005, Morel was released from prison for this conviction and was placed on a five year term for supervised release.
Sometime thereafter, Morel committed assault with a deadly weapon, also in violation of the laws of the District of Columbia. On September 29, 2006, Morel was sentenced for the assault charge to 60 months' imprisonment and a three year term of supervised release ("Second D.C. Conviction"). Meanwhile, the Commission issued a warrant accusing Morel of violating his supervised release under the First D.C. Conviction due to the assault.
On July 10, 2010, Morel completed the 60 month term for the Second D.C. conviction. Taking time credits into account, Morel served 53 months. Morel was kept in custody, however, due to the Commission's warrant for his First D.C. Conviction.
On December 16, 2011, the Commission revoked Morel's supervised release for the First D.C. Conviction and imposed an 88 month imprisonment sentence, set to run concurrently with the 53 months already served. The Commission did not, however, impose another supervised release sentence on the First D.C. Conviction. Thus, to complete the imprisonment and supervised release portion of the First D.C. Conviction, Morel had to serve an additional 35 months in prison. This 35 month term began on July 9, 2010, i.e., when the Commission's supervised release warrant went into effect.
On September 6, 2012, Morel filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Virginia Court ("Virginia Petition"), seeking vacatur of the 88 month revocation of supervised release as to his First D.C. Conviction. At the time, he was an inmate in the federal penitentiary in Virginia. At some point thereafter, however, Morel was transferred to a facility in New York City. On December 3, 2012, Morel filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in this Court ("New York Petition"), also seeking vacatur of the 88 month revocation of supervised release as to his First D.C. Conviction. Because, as previously recognized, the Virginia Petition and New York Petition are "virtually identical, " this Court stayed the present action, pending the conclusion of Virginia proceedings. Morel v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 12 Civ. 8830 (DLC), Docket No. 16 (S.D.N.Y. April 30, 2013).
On January 22, 2013, Morel completed the 35 month term remaining on his First D.C. Conviction and was released from custody. The respondent in the Virginia action moved for dismissal or summary judgment on the ground that the Virginia petition was moot. Morel, represented in the Virginia action, filed an opposition.
On July 2, the Virginia Decision was issued, dismissing the Virginia Petition as moot. Morel had failed to establish the existence of collateral consequences, which is necessary to meet the Article III case-or-controversy requirement when the term of supervised release being challenged in his petition has expired. Virginia Decision, 2014 WL 3336751, at *2-*3. Morel sought a certificate of appealability from the Fourth Circuit, which was denied. Morel v. Zych, No. 13-7168, 2014 WL 280049 (4th Cir. Jan 27, 2014).
The stay in this action was thus lifted, and the Commission was required to file any motion in this action by April 18. Morel was ...