Lear v. Poole
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 13 denying petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Clerk of court to close case. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 5/17/2010. (JMB)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W E S T E R N DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
G A R Y T. LEAR, Petitioner, v. ORDER 06-CV-750
THOMAS POOLE, Superintendent, Five Points Correctional Facility, R e s p o n d e n t.
T h is case was referred to Magistrate Judge Victor E. Bianchini, pursuant to 2 8 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on N o ve m b e r 14, 2006, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. August 17, 2009, after re s p o n d e n t answered the petition, petitioner filed a motion to amend his petition. On January 20, 2010, Magistrate Judge Bianchini filed a Report and R e c o m m e n d a tio n , recommending that petitioner's request for a writ of habeas c o rp u s be denied. P la in tiff filed objections to the Report and Recommendation on March 3, 2010. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo d e te rm in a tio n of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which o b je c tio n s have been made. Upon a de novo review of the Report and 1
Recommendation, and after reviewing the submissions, the Court adopts the p ro p o s e d findings of the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Bianchini's Report a n d Recommendation, petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied a n d the petition is dismissed. In addition, because the issues raised here are not the type of issues that a court c o u ld resolve in a different manner, and because these issues are not debatable a m o n g jurists of reason, the Court concludes that petitioner has failed to make a s u b s ta n tia l showing of the denial of a constitutional right, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), a n d accordingly the Court denies a certificate of appealability. T h e Court also hereby certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any a p p e a l from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and leave to appeal to the C o u rt of Appeals as a poor person is denied. Coppedge v. U.S., 369 U.S. 438, 82 S . Ct. 917, 8 L. Ed.2d 21 (1962). Further requests to proceed on appeal as a poor p e rs o n should be directed, on motion, to the United States Court of Appeals for th e Second Circuit, in accordance with Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate P ro c e d u re . The Clerk of Court shall take all steps necessary to close the case
s/ Richard J. Arcara
HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: May 17, 2010
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?