Harris v. Walker

S.D. New York

Harris v. Walker

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 20, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-06563·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK WILLIAM HARRIS, Petitioner, 22-CV-6563 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL C S. WALKER, Warden at R.N.D.C. C-74, Respondent. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated October 26, 2022, the Court notified Petitioner that his application, which challenged the constitutionality of his pretrial detention, would be recharacterized as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court directed Petitioner that, if he did not want to proceed under Section 2241, he should inform the Court within 30 days that he wishes to withdraw the petition. The Court further directed Petitioner, that if he did not withdraw the petition, within 60 days, he must file an amended Section 2241 petition showing that he had fully exhausted his state court remedies. That order specified that failure to comply would result in the denial of the petition. Petitioner has not filed an amended petition or indicated that he wishes to withdraw the petition. Accordingly, this Section 2241 habeas petition is denied without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to fully exhaust his state court remedies. CONCLUSION The petition is denied without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to exhaust his state court remedies. All other pending matters in this case are terminated. Because the petition makes no substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). Judgment shall enter. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case.

Dated: January 20, 2023 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK WILLIAM HARRIS, Petitioner, 22-CV-6563 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL C S. WALKER, Warden at R.N.D.C. C-74, Respondent. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated October 26, 2022, the Court notified Petitioner that his application, which challenged the constitutionality of his pretrial detention, would be recharacterized as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court directed Petitioner that, if he did not want to proceed under Section 2241, he should inform the Court within 30 days that he wishes to withdraw the petition. The Court further directed Petitioner, that if he did not withdraw the petition, within 60 days, he must file an amended Section 2241 petition showing that he had fully exhausted his state court remedies. That order specified that failure to comply would result in the denial of the petition. Petitioner has not filed an amended petition or indicated that he wishes to withdraw the petition. Accordingly, this Section 2241 habeas petition is denied without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to fully exhaust his state court remedies. CONCLUSION The petition is denied without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to exhaust his state court remedies. All other pending matters in this case are terminated. Because the petition makes no substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). Judgment shall enter. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case.

Dated: January 20, 2023 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

Harris v. Walker, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pincite

Harris v. Walker (Harris v. Walker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related