McVay v. Walker

S.D. New York

McVay v. Walker

DecidedJanuary 4, 2023

Docket1:22-cv-06572

StatusUnknown

This text of McVay v. Walker (McVay v. Walker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JEFFREY MCVAY, Petitioner, 22-CV-6572 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL WARDEN S. WALKER, Respondent. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated October 17, 2022, the Court directed Petitioner to file an amended petition within sixty days. That order specified that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the petition. Petitioner has not filed an amended petition. Accordingly, the petition, filed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), is denied without prejudice. Because the petition makes no substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 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). The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in this case. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 4, 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 JEFFREY MCVAY, Petitioner, 22-CV-6572 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL WARDEN S. WALKER, Respondent. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated October 17, 2022, the Court directed Petitioner to file an amended petition within sixty days. That order specified that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the petition. Petitioner has not filed an amended petition. Accordingly, the petition, filed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), is denied without prejudice. Because the petition makes no substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 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). The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in this case. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 4, 2023 New York, New York

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

McVay v. Walker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcvay-v-walker-nysd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack