Madison v. Hulihan
||Derrold V. Madison
||William F. Hulihan
||January 20, 2009
||US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
||Habeas Corpus (General) Office
||Dora Lizette Irizarry
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
||28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|March 23, 2012
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §2254 -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 is DISMISSED a s untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability, as he has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Luciadore v. New York State Div. of Parole, 209 F. 3d 107, 112 (2d Cir. 2000). The court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be ta ken in good faith, and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 44445 (1962).. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Memorandum and Order to pro se petitioner and to close this case. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 3/23/2012. (Irizarry, Dora)
|March 17, 2009
ORDER DIRECTING PRO SE PETITIONER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS SHOULD NOT BE DENIED AS TIME-BARRED-- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, petitioner is directed to show cause by written affir mation, within sixty (60) days from the date of this Order, that is, on or before May 18, 2009, why the instant petition should not be dismissed as time-barred. An affirmation form is attached to this Order for petitioner's convenience. Petitio ner's affirmation should include any facts which would support equitable tolling of the statute of limitations as set forth in the Attached Written Memorandum and Order. No response to the petition shall be required at this time and all further proceedings shall be stayed for sixty (60) days, that is until on or before May 18, 2009, for petitioner to comply with this Order. If petitioner fails to comply with this Order within the time allowed, the instant petition shall be dismissed as ti me-barred. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Electronic Order and the Attached Written Memorandum and Order and Affirmation Form to pro se petitioner. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 3/17/2009. (Irizarry, Dora)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?