Allicock v. Ashcroft

96 F. App'x 18
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedApril 5, 2004
DocketNo. 03-2413
StatusPublished

This text of 96 F. App'x 18 (Allicock v. Ashcroft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Allicock v. Ashcroft, 96 F. App'x 18 (2d Cir. 2004).

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be AFFIRMED.

Shawn Allicock appeals from a judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Korman, /.), dismissing his habeas petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Familiarity is assumed as to the facts, the procedural context, and the specification of appellate issues.

This Court reviews de novo the district court’s dismissal of a habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction. Kuhali v. Reno, 266 F.3d 93, 99 (2d Cir.2001). We affirm for substantially the reasons referenced by the district court.

We are aware that the district court has stayed Allicock’s final order of removal, pending its decision on a subsequent habeas petition. Our affirmance of the district court’s dismissal of the instant petition does not foreclose the district court’s consideration of that petition.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kuhali v. Reno
266 F.3d 93 (Second Circuit, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 F. App'x 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allicock-v-ashcroft-ca2-2004.