Hovey v. People of the State of Colorado, et al.

Filing 15

ORDER dismissing this action with prejudice, and denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 9/9/14. (dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-01543-BNB
JONATHAN WRAY HOVEY,
Applicant,
v.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondents.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Applicant, Jonathan Wray Hovey, initiated this action by filing pro se a pleading
tilted “Writ of Habeas Corpus” in which he challenges a federal detainer. Magistrate
Judge Boyd N. Boland directed Applicant to file his claims on a Court approved form
used in filing 28 U.S.C. § 2241 actions. On June 13, 2014, Applicant complied and filed
his claims on a proper Court-approved form. Applicant asserts in the Application that he
has been held for four months on a U.S. Postal Inspection Detainer without explanation
and requests that he be taken into federal custody for an appearance in court.
Magistrate Judge Boland then ordered Respondents to file a Preliminary
Response limited to addressing the affirmative defense of exhaustion of available
remedies with respect to the detainer. On August 8, 2014, Respondent United States of
America filed a Preliminary Response and stated that this case is moot because
Applicant has received the relief he requests. Respondent asserts that on July 29,
2014, Applicant appeared in the custody of the United States Marshals Service and had
an initial appearance in federal district court. See Prelim Resp., ECF No. 14-3, Ex. 3.

On August 1, 2014, Applicant appeared again in court for an arraignment and detention
hearing and did not contest detention. See id., ECF No. 14-4, Ex. 4. Respondent
concludes that because Applicant has been advised of the federal criminal charges
against him and remanded into federal custody he has received the relief he requested
in the Application.
Applicant did not reply to the Preliminary Response within the time allowed and
disagree with Respondent’s assertions. The Court, therefore, will dismiss this action as
moot.
The Court also certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from
this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status will be
denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438
(1962). If Applicant files a notice of appeal he also must pay the full $505 appellate
filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Application is denied as moot and the action is dismissed
with prejudice. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is
denied.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this

9th

day of

September

, 2014.

BY THE COURT:
s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court

2