Michel v. Lilly

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedFebruary 5, 2025
Docket1:25-cv-01023
StatusUnknown

This text of Michel v. Lilly (Michel v. Lilly) 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
Michel v. Lilly, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GARRY MICHEL, Petitioner, 25-CV-1023 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL LYNN LILLY, Superintendent, Respondent. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Petitioner who is currently incarcerated at Eastern NY Correctional Facility and acting pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. For the following reasons, the petition is dismissed without prejudice. Petitioner has previously submitted to this court an apparently identical petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in which he challenges the same 2019 Orange County conviction. That petition is pending in this court under docket number 25-CV-0921. Because this Section 2254 petition challenges the same conviction and appears to have been submitted in error, this petition is dismissed without prejudice to Petitioner’s pending case under docket number 25-CV-0921. CONCLUSOIN The Court dismisses this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 without prejudice to Petitioner’s pending case under docket number 25-CV-0921. 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 in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Because the petition at this time 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 Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this matter. SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 5, 2025 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

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michel v. Lilly, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michel-v-lilly-nysd-2025.