Williams v. Ercole

Williams v. Ercole

Petitioner:	Kenyatta Williams
Respondent:	Robert Ercole
Case Number:	2:2009cv00363
Filed:	January 2, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County:	Suffolk
Presiding Judge:	Sandra J. Feuerstein
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

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
February 27, 2012	Filing 30 ORDER AND OPINION: On October 17, 2011,judgment was entered in favor of respondent in this proceeding upon this Court's order, entered October 14,2011, inter alia, dismissing the petition in its entirety. Since petitioner did not make a substant ial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability from the final judgment in this proceeding is denied. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve notice of entry of this Order in accordance with Rule 77(d)(l) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including mailing a copy of the Order to the prose petitioner at his last known address. CM to pro se petitioner. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 2/27/2012. (Florio, Lisa)
July 7, 2009	Filing 15 OPINION AND ORDER denying 11 Motion to Stay. Petitioner's application for a stay of his habeas petition is denied, but petitioner is granted and extension of time to respond to the respondent's return until August 3, 2009. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 7/7/2009. cm (Brienza, Lauren)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 27, 2012

Filing 30 ORDER AND OPINION: On October 17, 2011,judgment was entered in favor of respondent in this proceeding upon this Court's order, entered October 14,2011, inter alia, dismissing the petition in its entirety. Since petitioner did not make a substant ial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability from the final judgment in this proceeding is denied. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve notice of entry of this Order in accordance with Rule 77(d)(l) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including mailing a copy of the Order to the prose petitioner at his last known address. CM to pro se petitioner. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 2/27/2012. (Florio, Lisa)

July 7, 2009

Filing 15 OPINION AND ORDER denying 11 Motion to Stay. Petitioner's application for a stay of his habeas petition is denied, but petitioner is granted and extension of time to respond to the respondent's return until August 3, 2009. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 7/7/2009. cm (Brienza, Lauren)

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: Williams v. Ercole
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Kenyatta Williams
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: Robert Ercole
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?