Martin v. Lee

Martin v. Lee

Petitioner:	Elvis Martin
Respondent:	William Lee
Case Number:	1:2010cv05411
Filed:	July 15, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Dutchess
Presiding Judge:	Richard Owen
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
July 26, 2018	Filing 38 MEMORANDUM & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONS for 29 Report and Recommendations: Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 29) in its entirety. The Court denies Martin's habeas cor pus petition and directs the Clerk of the Court to close the case and to terminate the Motion at ECF No. 36. The Court declines to issue certificate of appealability on the basis that Martin has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 22 53 (c); Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005). (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 7/26/2018) (jwh)
June 20, 2017	Filing 29 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re: 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Elvis Martin. In light of these facts, the decision of the Appellate Division was not an unreasonable application of either Supreme Court precedent or the facts at h and. At most this is a question on which "fairminded jurists could disagree," and therefore the decision of the Appellate Division cannot be overturned. Richter, 562 U.S. at 101. For the reasons set forth above, I recommend that Mr. Mar tin's petition for a writ of habeas corpus be denied. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rules 72, 6(a), and 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties shall have ten (10) days from this date to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation. Such objections shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court, with extra copies delivered to the chambers of the Honorable Loretta A. Preska, Room 2220, and to the chambers of the undersigned, Room 1960, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York 10007. Failure to file timely objections will preclude appellate review. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 6/20/2017) Copies Transmitted this Date By Chambers. (anc)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 26, 2018

Filing 38 MEMORANDUM & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONS for 29 Report and Recommendations: Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 29) in its entirety. The Court denies Martin's habeas cor pus petition and directs the Clerk of the Court to close the case and to terminate the Motion at ECF No. 36. The Court declines to issue certificate of appealability on the basis that Martin has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 22 53 (c); Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005). (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 7/26/2018) (jwh)

June 20, 2017

Filing 29 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re: 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Elvis Martin. In light of these facts, the decision of the Appellate Division was not an unreasonable application of either Supreme Court precedent or the facts at h and. At most this is a question on which "fairminded jurists could disagree," and therefore the decision of the Appellate Division cannot be overturned. Richter, 562 U.S. at 101. For the reasons set forth above, I recommend that Mr. Mar tin's petition for a writ of habeas corpus be denied. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rules 72, 6(a), and 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties shall have ten (10) days from this date to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation. Such objections shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court, with extra copies delivered to the chambers of the Honorable Loretta A. Preska, Room 2220, and to the chambers of the undersigned, Room 1960, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York 10007. Failure to file timely objections will preclude appellate review. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 6/20/2017) Copies Transmitted this Date By Chambers. (anc)

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

Search for this case: Martin v. Lee
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Elvis Martin
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: William Lee
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?