Aponte v. Modica (Judge) of Queens Ciminal Courthouse, NY

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Eastern District Aponte v. Modica (Judge) of Queens Ciminal Courthouse, NY

Aponte v. Modica (Judge) of Queens Ciminal Courthouse, NY

Petitioner:	Herbert Aponte
Respondent:	Modica (Judge) of Queens Ciminal Courthouse, NY
Case Number:	1:2013cv05149
Filed:	September 16, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge:	Carol Bagley Amon
Presiding Judge:	Lois Bloom
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
October 22, 2013	Filing 7 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the same reasons as stated in this Court's February 28, 2011 memorandum and order, Aponte's instant habeas petition is dismissed. Aponte is not in custody pursuant to the 2006 conviction because his probation term inated on June 22, 2007, and the Court is therefore without jurisdiction to hear his § 2254 petition. Since Aponte has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," a Certificate of Appealability shall not issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, and therefore denies in forma pauperis status for purposes of appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-46 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and to close the case. Ordered by Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 10/21/2013. (fwd for judgment) (Fernandez, Erica)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 22, 2013

Filing 7 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the same reasons as stated in this Court's February 28, 2011 memorandum and order, Aponte's instant habeas petition is dismissed. Aponte is not in custody pursuant to the 2006 conviction because his probation term inated on June 22, 2007, and the Court is therefore without jurisdiction to hear his § 2254 petition. Since Aponte has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," a Certificate of Appealability shall not issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, and therefore denies in forma pauperis status for purposes of appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-46 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and to close the case. Ordered by Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 10/21/2013. (fwd for judgment) (Fernandez, Erica)

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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Aponte v. Modica (Judge) of Queens Ciminal Courthouse, NY
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Modica (Judge) of Queens Ciminal Courthouse, NY
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 ]
Petitioner: Herbert Aponte
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?