Davis v. Cunningham
ORDER: ORDERED, that the 17 Report and Recommendation is hereby adopted in its entirety. ORDERED, that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied. Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). ORDERED, that no certificate of appealability shall issue. Signed by Chief Judge Norman A. Mordue on 8/13/10. (Order served on petitioner by regular mail) (alh, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________ SIVAD DAVIS, Petitioner, vs. RAMON CUNNINGHAM, Respondent. ________________________________________________ APPEARANCES: Sivad Davis 98-B-0943 Woodbourne Correctional Facility Riverside Drive Woodbourne, NY 12788 Petitioner, pro se
Hon. Andrew M. Cuomo Attorney General for the State of New York The Capitol Albany, New York 12224-0341 Attorney for Defendant Norman A. Mordue, Chief U. S. District Judge
Paul Tarr, Esq. Assistant Attorney General
ORDER The above matter comes to me following a Report-Recommendation by Magistrate Judge David R. Homer, duly filed on the 22nd day of July 2010. Following ten days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent me the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein. After careful review of all of the papers herein, including the Magistrate Judge's ReportRecommendation, and no objections submitted thereto, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report-Recommendation is hereby adopted in its entirety.
2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied. Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); accordingly, no certificate of appealability shall issue. 3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order upon all parties and the Magistrate Judge assigned to this case. IT IS SO ORDERED.
N A M
Date: August 13, 2010 Syracuse, New York
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?