Best v. Griffin

Best v. Griffin

Petitioner:	Sean Best
Respondent:	Thomas Griffin
Case Number:	1:2015cv04073
Filed:	May 27, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Dutchess
Presiding Judge:	Colleen McMahon
Presiding Judge:	Andrew J. Peck
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
July 26, 2016	Filing 24 DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT & RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE RECOMMENDING THAT THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2254 BE DENIED re: 16 Report and Recommendations. Regarding Best's i neffective assistance of counsel claim, the Court adopts the reasoning of the magistrate without elaboration. The petition is denied. As Petitioner has made no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, there is no question of sub stance for appellate review. Therefore, no certificate of appealability shall issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; see United States v. Perez, 129 F. 3d 255, 259-60 (2d Cir. 1997); Lozada v. United States, 107 F. 3d 1011 (2d Cir. 1997); Rodriguez v. Scul ly, 905 F. 2d 24 (2d Cir. 1990). I certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 7/26/2016) (kgo)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 26, 2016

Filing 24 DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT & RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE RECOMMENDING THAT THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2254 BE DENIED re: 16 Report and Recommendations. Regarding Best's i neffective assistance of counsel claim, the Court adopts the reasoning of the magistrate without elaboration. The petition is denied. As Petitioner has made no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, there is no question of sub stance for appellate review. Therefore, no certificate of appealability shall issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; see United States v. Perez, 129 F. 3d 255, 259-60 (2d Cir. 1997); Lozada v. United States, 107 F. 3d 1011 (2d Cir. 1997); Rodriguez v. Scul ly, 905 F. 2d 24 (2d Cir. 1990). I certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 7/26/2016) (kgo)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Best v. Griffin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Sean Best
Represented By:	Siobhan Briley
Represented By:	Franklin B. Velie
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Thomas Griffin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?