Pruitt v. Kirkpatrick

Pruitt v. Kirkpatrick

Petitioner:	Donnell Pruitt
Respondent:	Michael Kirkpatrick
Case Number:	1:2016cv02703
Filed:	April 12, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Clinton
Presiding Judge:	Loretta A. Preska
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
October 18, 2017	Filing 28 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: It is well established that "[a]n excessive sentence claim may not provide grounds for habeas corpus relief where a petitioner's sentence is within the range prescribed by state law." Edwards v. Superint endent, Southport C.F., 991 F. Supp. 2d 348, 372 (E.D.N.Y. 2013); see also White v. Keane, 969 F.2d 1381, 1383 (2d Cir. 1992) ("No federal constitutional issue is presented where... the sentence is within the range prescribed by state law." ;). Here, Pruitt was sentenced to twenty-five years to life in prison, which is within the range prescribed by state law for second-degree murder. See N.Y. Penal Law §§ 70.00(2), 125.25; see also, e.g., Paul v. Ercole, No. 07-CV-9462 (CM ) (HBP), 2010 WL 2899645, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. June 10, 2010) (collecting cases upholding 25-years-to-life sentences for second-degree murder). Thus, Pruitt's final claim must be and is rejected. For the foregoing reasons, Pruitt's Petition i s DENIED, and the case is DISMISSED. As Pruitt has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue at this time. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); see also, e.g., Matthews v. United States, 682 F.3d 180, 185 (2d Cir. 2012). In addition, this Court certifies, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and in forma pauperis status is thus denie d. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Pruitt and to close this case, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/18/2017) (ras) Modified on 10/18/2017 (ras).

Date Filed

Document Text

October 18, 2017

Filing 28 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: It is well established that "[a]n excessive sentence claim may not provide grounds for habeas corpus relief where a petitioner's sentence is within the range prescribed by state law." Edwards v. Superint endent, Southport C.F., 991 F. Supp. 2d 348, 372 (E.D.N.Y. 2013); see also White v. Keane, 969 F.2d 1381, 1383 (2d Cir. 1992) ("No federal constitutional issue is presented where... the sentence is within the range prescribed by state law." ;). Here, Pruitt was sentenced to twenty-five years to life in prison, which is within the range prescribed by state law for second-degree murder. See N.Y. Penal Law §§ 70.00(2), 125.25; see also, e.g., Paul v. Ercole, No. 07-CV-9462 (CM ) (HBP), 2010 WL 2899645, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. June 10, 2010) (collecting cases upholding 25-years-to-life sentences for second-degree murder). Thus, Pruitt's final claim must be and is rejected. For the foregoing reasons, Pruitt's Petition i s DENIED, and the case is DISMISSED. As Pruitt has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue at this time. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); see also, e.g., Matthews v. United States, 682 F.3d 180, 185 (2d Cir. 2012). In addition, this Court certifies, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and in forma pauperis status is thus denie d. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Pruitt and to close this case, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/18/2017) (ras) Modified on 10/18/2017 (ras).

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: Pruitt v. Kirkpatrick
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Donnell Pruitt
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: Michael Kirkpatrick
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?