Whether prison administrative lockdowns and operational changes that substantially impair an inmate's ability to timely access legal materials and file appellate documents constitute a violation of due process rights

No question identified. : 3. From December of 2023 through February of 2024, less than 15 days were spent on normal operations in this facility. That alone may justify granting extension of time. However, additional time requested herein is needed for further studying and researching the issues of the court's decision below. Access to which, has become extremely difficult due to the newly implemented operations. 4. Another pertinent affect of these lockdowns and operational changes is the unprecedented delays in sending and receiving mails. That includes legal mails as well. In some instances, the mails are served to Prisoners several days after the deadline to respond. In Petitioner's case, his Petition for En bane review -though timely filed, -was delivered nearly 45-days after the mandate was issued by the court below. 5. No amount of filing grievances in the Prison has affected the change in view of the Officials. In fact, Petitioner is at the mercy of this Unit Counsellors and their available time to access his own documents. The Officials cite, staff shortages and large case load as reasons to decline access. Other times, they procrastinate, so much so, that the deadlines have come and gone. Even though, these ring the sounds of prison grievances, Petitioner has no other means, but to seek extension from this Court. 6. Petitioner does not seek this extension for dilatory purposes. No parties will be prejudiced by granting this extension at this time. Petitioner does not make this application in bad faith. CONCLUSION. 7. The foregoing demonstrates conditions outside the Petitioner's control. Each of which justifies in meeting the ends of justice. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests an ORDER extending the time for filing a petition for Writ of Certiorari -a valuable opportunity in his collateral attack -be GRANTED in this case. Respectfully Submitted, Date Executed: .. By: Daniel Hess. / Ff a o/s | wey DL Lh Certificate of Service. On the flo day of XY , the year 2024, the undersigned deposited the foregoing motion(s) ; (i). Affixed with adequate postage prepaid ; (ii). [ ] Certified and tracked using : (iii). As per the Prison Mailbox Rule ; For it to be delivered to the Office of the Clerk. | JA true copy of the motion(s) were also served at the following address I SWEAR, AFFIRM, and CERTIFY that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. It is offered under the penalty of perjury, as authorized by the laws of United States. See 28 U.S.C.S. §1746. Name: Inmate No. United States Penitentiary. P.O. BOX 24550. Tucson, AZ. 85734. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No: 23-2257 Daniel Hess, also known as Jason Hess Petitioner Appellant v. United States of America Respondent Appellee Appeal from U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota Western (5:20-cv-05005-KES) JUDGMENT Before COLLOTON, KELLY, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. This appeal comes before the court on appellant's application for a certificate of appealability. The court has carefully reviewed the original file of the district court, and the application for a certificate of appealability is denied. The appeal is dismissed. September 05, 2023 Order Entered at the Direction of the Court: Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. /s/ Michael E. Gans Appellate Case: 23-2257 Page:1 Date Filed: 09/05/2023 Entry ID: 5313222 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No: 23-2257 Daniel Hess, also known as Jason Hess Appellant v. United States of America Appellee Appeal from U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota Western (5:20-cv-05005-KES) ORDER The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The petition for rehearing by the panel is also denied. December 12, 2023 Order Entered at the Direction of the Court: Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. /s/ Michael E. Gans Appellate Case: 23-2257 Page:1 Date Filed: 12/12/2023 Entry ID: 5343702