Wright v. Superintendent

Filing 52

ORDER adopting 51 Report and Recommendations. The petition (Dkt. No. 1 ) is DENIED AND DISMISSED as time-barred. No Certificate of Appealability shall issue because petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). Signed by Judge Brenda K. Sannes on 2/25/17. (Copy served on petitioner via regular mail)(rjb, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ______________________________________________________ LEON F. WRIGHT, Petitioner, v. 9:12-CV-1861 (BKS/TWD) SUPERINTENDENT, Respondent. ________________________________________________ Appearances: Leon F. Wright 07-B-1667 Coxsackie Correctional Facility P.O. Box 999 Coxsackie, NY 12051 Petitioner, pro se Paul B. Lyons, Esq. Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman Office of New York State Attorney General 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Attorney for Respondent Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, United States District Judge: MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER Petitioner Leon F. Wright, a New York State inmate, commenced this habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on October 23, 2012. Dkt. No. 1. Respondent filed a response to the petition on April 15, 2013. Dkt. Nos. 12-14. His supplemental response was filed on August 29, 2016. Dkt. No. 42. This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks who, on December 16, 2016, issued an Order and Report-Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied and dismissed on the grounds that it is time-barred, and recommending that a certificate of appealability not issue. Dkt. No. 51. Magistrate Judge Dancks advised the parties that under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen days within which to file written objections to the report, and that the failure to object to the report within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. Dkt. No. 51, p. 23. No objections to the ReportRecommendation have been filed. As no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223, 228-29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed Judge Dancks’ thorough ReportRecommendation for clear error and found none, the Report-Recommendation is adopted in its entirety. For these reasons, it is ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 51) is ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that the petition (Dkt. No. 1) is DENIED AND DISMISSED as timebarred; and it is further ORDERED that no Certificate of Appealability shall issue because petitioner failed to make a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right” as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order upon the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 25, 2017 2

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?