Ramirez v. Keyser

S.D. New York

Ramirez v. Keyser

DecidedMarch 12, 2024

Docket7:20-cv-08445

StatusUnknown

This text of Ramirez v. Keyser (Ramirez v. Keyser) 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

Ramirez v. Keyser, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Petitioner, 20 CIVIL 8445 (KMK) -against- JUDGMENT WILLIAM F. KEYSER, Respondent . none eK

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated March 12, 2024, the Court, having conducted a thorough and de novo review of the R&R, finds no error. The Court has adopted the outcome of Judge Davison's R&R. Petitioner's writ of habeas corpus is accordingly dismissed with prejudice. As Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a Certificate of Appealability shall not be issued, see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lucidore v. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 11112 (2d Cir. 2000), and the Court further certifies, pursuant to 28 § 1915(a) (3), that an appeal from this judgment on the merits would not be taken in good faith, see Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962) ("We consider a [petitioner's] good faith... demonstrated he seeks appellate review of any issue not frivolous."); Burda Media Inc. v. Blumenberg, 731 F. Supp. 2d 321, 32223 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (citing Coppedge and noting that an appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if court certifies in writing that it was not taken in good faith); accordingly, the case is closed. Dated: New York, New York March 12, 2024 RUBY J. KRAJICK Clerkof Court | BY: HK. MANGO 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

Petitioner, 20 CIVIL 8445 (KMK) -against- JUDGMENT WILLIAM F. KEYSER, Respondent . none eK

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated March 12, 2024, the Court, having conducted a thorough and de novo review of the R&R, finds no error. The Court has adopted the outcome of Judge Davison's R&R. Petitioner's writ of habeas corpus is accordingly dismissed with prejudice. As Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a Certificate of Appealability shall not be issued, see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lucidore v. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 11112 (2d Cir. 2000), and the Court further certifies, pursuant to 28 § 1915(a) (3), that an appeal from this judgment on the merits would not be taken in good faith, see Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962) ("We consider a [petitioner's] good faith... demonstrated he seeks appellate review of any issue not frivolous."); Burda Media Inc. v. Blumenberg, 731 F. Supp. 2d 321, 32223 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (citing Coppedge and noting that an appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if court certifies in writing that it was not taken in good faith); accordingly, the case is closed. Dated: New York, New York March 12, 2024 RUBY J. KRAJICK Clerkof Court | BY: HK. MANGO Deputy Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ramirez v. Keyser, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ramirez-v-keyser-nysd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack