Hairston v. Bell

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ERYCHAIRSTON, SSS

Petitioner, 21 CIVIL 6503 (NSR)(VR) -against- JUDGMENT EARL BELL, Superintendent, Respondent. wae K It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated October 10, 2024, the Court has adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus 1s, therefore, DENIED. As Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 6 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005); Lozada v. United States, 107 F.3d 1011, 1017 (2d Cir. 1997), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Perez, 129 F.3d 225, 259-60 (2d Cir. 1997). The Court certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status 1s denied for the purposes of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962); accordingly, the case is closed. Dated: New York, New York October 11, 2024 DANIEL ORTIZ Acting Clerk of Court BY: K (MANGO Deputy Clerk