PROMESA did not suspend the writ of habeas corpus in Puerto Rico, according to District Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi of San Juan.
A prisoner serving a 144-year prison term for murder and carjacking filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, claiming innocence and ineffective assistance of counsel. Before the answer was due, Puerto Rico had filed its petition under Title III of the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act, or PROMESA. The island government contended that the habeas proceeding was automatically enjoined by Sections 362 and 922 of the Bankruptcy Code, incorporated by reference under Title III of PROMESA.
In his June 23 opinion, Judge Gelpi employed the usual analysis, saying that the automatic stay bars prosecution of a “claim,” a broadly defined term that means a right to payment. He said that a claim “does not include a petition for a writ of habeas corpus,” which “concerns a person’s liberty; it does not seek a right to payment” nor any equitable remedy for which a monetary reward would be an alternative.
If PROMESA automatically enjoined habeas proceedings, Judge Gelpi said, “the stay would effectively suspend the writ of habeas corpus.” He selected an interpretation of PROMESA that would avoid constitutional problems.
The government argued that the cost of preparing an English translation of lengthy criminal proceedings would be “gargantuan.” Denying the motion to dismiss and the government’s request for a stay, Judge Gelpi said the cost did “not compare, however, to the fundamental liberty interest – freedom from unlawful restraint – protected by the writ of habeas corpus and the Constitution.”