Alomar v. The State of New York
Alexander Alomar |
The State of New York and Darwin LaClair |
9:2023cv00555 |
May 8, 2023 |
US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
Glenn T Suddaby |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 14, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 JUDGMENT that, pursuant to the Decision and Order (Dkt. No. #4 ) issued on June 14, 2023 by the Honorable Glenn T. Suddaby, the Clerk is respectfully requested to update the caption to reflect the proper respondent. The petition, Dkt. No. #1 , is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as premature for failure to exhaust available state court remedies. No certificate of appealability ("COA") shall issue in this case because petitioner has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). Any further request for a COA must be addressed to the Court of Appeals (Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)). The Clerk is directed to close this case. All of the above pursuant to the Decision and Order dated June 14, 2023 issued by the Honorable Glenn T. Suddaby. Dkt. No. #4 . (Served petitioner by regular mail). (sal ) |
Filing 4 DECISION AND ORDER that the Clerk is respectfully requested to update the caption to reflect the proper respondent. The petition, Dkt. No. #1 , is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as premature for failure to exhaust available state court remedies. No certificate of appealability ("COA") shall issue in this case because petitioner has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). Any further request for a COA must be addressed to the Court of Appeals (Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)). Signed by U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 6/14/2023. (Copy served upon petitioner via regular mail) (sal) |
Filing 3 TEXT ORDER REOPENING CASE: This action was administratively closed due to petitioner's failure to comply with the filing fee requirements, and petitioner was directed to respond to the Order if s/he wished to pursue this action. Petitioner has now responded. The Clerk is directed to reopen this action and restore it to the Court's active docket. Authorized by U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on May 22, 2023. {text order served via regular mail on petitioner}(nas) |
Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number 500000443 (nas, ) |
Filing 2 ORDER Directing Administrative Closure with Opportunity to Comply with Filing Fee Requirement. Because this action was not properly commenced, the Clerk is directed to administratively close this action. If petitioner wants to pursue this action, he must so notify the Court WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS of the filing date of this Order and either: (1) pay the court's filing fee of five dollars ($5.00); or (2) submit a completed and signed IFP Application that has been certified by an appropriate prison official at his facility. Upon petitioner's compliance with this order, the Clerk shall reopen this action and forward it to the Court for review. The Clerk shall serve a copy of this Order on petitioner along with a blank IFP Application. Signed by U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 5/11/2023. (Attachments: #1 Blank IFP Application) (Copy served upon petitioner via regular mail) (sal) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Alexander Alomar. (Attachments: #1 cover letter, #2 envelope)(nas ) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.