Wright v. Poole

Wright v. Poole

Petitioner:	Bruce Wright
Respondent:	Poole
Case Number:	7:2002cv08669
Filed:	October 30, 2002
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	White Plains Office
County:	Seneca
Presiding Judge:	Kenneth M. Karas
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
December 17, 2014	Filing 62 OPINION AND ORDER: Petitioner's Motion to vacate the Court's Order is dismissed in its entirety. Because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not iss ue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lucidore v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 11113 (2d Cir. 2000). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, see Cop pedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 44445 (1962). However, the Court apologizes to Mr. Wright for mistakenly omitting to rule on his Discovery Motion. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motion. (See Dkt. No. 59.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 12/12/2014) (lnl)
September 28, 2012	Filing 37 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 21 Report and Recommendations. Having reviewed de novo Magistrate Judge Fox's R&R and the record on which it was based, the R&R is adopted in its entirety, and the Petition is dismissed. Because Pe titioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lucidore v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 111-13 (2d Cir. 2000). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, see Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to close this case. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 9/28/2012) The Clerks Office Has Mailed Copies. (fk)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 17, 2014

Filing 62 OPINION AND ORDER: Petitioner's Motion to vacate the Court's Order is dismissed in its entirety. Because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not iss ue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lucidore v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 11113 (2d Cir. 2000). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, see Cop pedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 44445 (1962). However, the Court apologizes to Mr. Wright for mistakenly omitting to rule on his Discovery Motion. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motion. (See Dkt. No. 59.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 12/12/2014) (lnl)

September 28, 2012

Filing 37 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 21 Report and Recommendations. Having reviewed de novo Magistrate Judge Fox's R&R and the record on which it was based, the R&R is adopted in its entirety, and the Petition is dismissed. Because Pe titioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lucidore v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 111-13 (2d Cir. 2000). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, see Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to close this case. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 9/28/2012) The Clerks Office Has Mailed Copies. (fk)

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: Wright v. Poole
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Bruce Wright
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: Poole
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?