Ford v. Smith

Ford v. Smith

Petitioner:	Corey Ford
Respondent:	Joseph T. Smith
Case Number:	7:2012cv08993
Filed:	December 10, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	White Plains Office
County:	Orange
Presiding Judge:	Vincent L. Briccetti
Presiding Judge:	Lisa Margaret Smith
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
February 12, 2021	Filing 84 TRANSFER ORDER: The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Petitioner and note service on the docket. In the interest of justice, the Court transfers Petitioner's motion (ECF 80) to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as a second or successive§ 2254 petition. See§ 1631; Liriano, 95 F.3d at 122-23. If the Court of Appeals authorizes Petitioner to proceed in this matter, he shall move to reopen this action under docket number 7:12-CV-8 993 (VB). Because Petitioner 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. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an y appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 2/12/2021) (jca) Transmission to Appeals Clerk.
January 3, 2017	Filing 76 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The R&R is adopted as the opinion of the Court for the reasons stated herein. Accordingly, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. The Clerk is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. As petitioner 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); Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005). The Court certifies under 28 U. S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith; therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 1/3/2017) (mml)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 12, 2021

Filing 84 TRANSFER ORDER: The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Petitioner and note service on the docket. In the interest of justice, the Court transfers Petitioner's motion (ECF 80) to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as a second or successive§ 2254 petition. See§ 1631; Liriano, 95 F.3d at 122-23. If the Court of Appeals authorizes Petitioner to proceed in this matter, he shall move to reopen this action under docket number 7:12-CV-8 993 (VB). Because Petitioner 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. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an y appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 2/12/2021) (jca) Transmission to Appeals Clerk.

January 3, 2017

Filing 76 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The R&R is adopted as the opinion of the Court for the reasons stated herein. Accordingly, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. The Clerk is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. As petitioner 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); Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005). The Court certifies under 28 U. S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith; therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 1/3/2017) (mml)

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: Ford v. Smith
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Corey Ford
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: Joseph T. Smith
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?