Snyder v. Kaplan

Filing 22

ORDER adopting 21 Report and Recommendations. The petition is denied and dismissed. No certificate of appealability shall issue. Signed by Judge Brenda K. Sannes on 8/10/15 (served on petitioner via regular mail). (rjb, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ___________________________________________ BRENDA SNYDER, Petitioner, v. 9:13-CV-1041 (BKS/RFT) SABINA KAPLAN, Respondent. ___________________________________________ APPEARANCES: Brenda Snyder, Petitioner Pro Se 01-G-0853 Bedford Hills Correctional Facility 247 Harris Road Bedford Hills, NY 10507 Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman New York State Attorney General Paul B. Lyons, Esq., Assistant Attorney General 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 For Respondent Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, United States District Court Judge ORDER On August 26, 2013, petitioner Brenda Snyder filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a writ of habeas corpus challenging a 2001 judgment of conviction in Franklin County Court for second degree murder, first degree assault (four counts) and first degree reckless endangerment (eight counts). (Dkt. No. 1). Respondent filed an answer to the petition, with a supporting memorandum of law, and the state court record; and petitioner filed a traverse. (Dkt. Nos. 13-17, 19). The petition was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece who, on July 15, 2015, issued a Report-Recommendation and Order, recommending that the petition be denied in its entirety. (Dkt. No. 21). Magistrate Judge Treece advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file written objections to the report and that the failure to object within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. (Dkt. No. 21, p. 17-18). A copy of the ReportRecommendation and Order was served on petitioner by regular mail on July 15, 2015, and no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed. (Dkt. No. 21). Since no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed and the time for filing objections has expired, the Court has reviewed 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 the 1983 addition. Under this standard, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Id. Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation and having found no clear error, it is hereby: ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 21) is ADOPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and it is further ORDERED that the petition (Dkt. No. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that, because petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, no certificate of appealability shall issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk shall close this case; and it is further 2 ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order on petitioner in accordance with the local rules. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 10, 2015 3

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?