Jessamy v. Lamanna

S.D. New York

Jessamy v. Lamanna

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided July 14, 2025·No. 7:21-cv-09242·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK THOMASLJESSAMY, Petitioner, 21 CIVIL 9242 (NSR)\(JCM) -against- JUDGMENT AMY LAMANNA, SUPERINTENDENT, N.Y:S. D.O.C.C.S. Respondents. we K It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion & Order dated July 11, 2025, and for the reasons delineated in the opinion and those delineated in MJ McCarthy’s thorough and well-reasoned R&R, which the Court has adopted, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is 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). 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 is 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 July 14, 2025 TAMMI M. HELLWIG ClerkofCourt

BY: K, MANGE Deputy Clerk

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 THOMASLJESSAMY, Petitioner, 21 CIVIL 9242 (NSR)\(JCM) -against- JUDGMENT AMY LAMANNA, SUPERINTENDENT, N.Y:S. D.O.C.C.S. Respondents. we K It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion & Order dated July 11, 2025, and for the reasons delineated in the opinion and those delineated in MJ McCarthy’s thorough and well-reasoned R&R, which the Court has adopted, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is 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). 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 is 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 July 14, 2025 TAMMI M. HELLWIG ClerkofCourt

BY: K, MANGE Deputy Clerk

Jessamy v. Lamanna, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

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

Opinion

Related