Rought v. Superintendent

Rought v. Superintendent

Petitioner:	Todd A. Rought
Respondent:	Superintendent
Case Number:	9:2012cv00622
Filed:	April 12, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Office:	Prisoner Office
County:	Cayuga
Presiding Judge:	Norman A. Mordue
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
January 9, 2014	Filing 28 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED THAT Roughts Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT this Court issues a Certificate of Appealability only with respect to Rought's interrelat ed claims that counsel was ineffective for failing to bring to the trial court's attention any issues regarding his competency, that the court should have sua sponte held a competency hearing prior to accepting his guilty plea, and that his p lea was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered due to issues of incompetency. This Court declines to issues a Certificate of Appealability with respect to all other claims. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Banks v. Dretke, 540 U.S. 668, 7 05 (2004). Any further request for a Certificate of Appealability must be addressed to the Court of Appeals. See FED. R. APP. P. 22 (b); Second Circuit R. 22.1. The Clerk of the Court is to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge James K. Singleton on 1/8/2014. (ptm) (Copy served on petitioner by regular mail)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 9, 2014

Filing 28 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED THAT Roughts Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT this Court issues a Certificate of Appealability only with respect to Rought's interrelat ed claims that counsel was ineffective for failing to bring to the trial court's attention any issues regarding his competency, that the court should have sua sponte held a competency hearing prior to accepting his guilty plea, and that his p lea was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered due to issues of incompetency. This Court declines to issues a Certificate of Appealability with respect to all other claims. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Banks v. Dretke, 540 U.S. 668, 7 05 (2004). Any further request for a Certificate of Appealability must be addressed to the Court of Appeals. See FED. R. APP. P. 22 (b); Second Circuit R. 22.1. The Clerk of the Court is to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge James K. Singleton on 1/8/2014. (ptm) (Copy served on petitioner by regular mail)

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

Search for this case: Rought v. Superintendent
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Todd A. Rought
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: Superintendent
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?