Turley v. Graham

Turley v. Graham

Petitioner:	Paul S. Turley
Respondent:	Harold D. Graham
Case Number:	6:2017cv06379
Filed:	June 15, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of New York
Office:	Rochester Office
County:	Niagara
Presiding Judge:	Charles J. Siragusa
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
February 11, 2021	Filing 23 DECISION AND ORDER dismissing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Paul S. Turley. Petitioner Paul S. Turley's application for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 [ECF No. 1] is denied. The Clerk of the Court is directe d to close this case. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability, since Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The Court hereby certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals as a poor person is denied. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). Further requests to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis should be directed on motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in accordance with Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 2/11/21. Copy of this NEF and order mailed to pro se petitioner at Auburn.(KAP)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-

Date Filed

Document Text

February 11, 2021

Filing 23 DECISION AND ORDER dismissing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Paul S. Turley. Petitioner Paul S. Turley's application for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 [ECF No. 1] is denied. The Clerk of the Court is directe d to close this case. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability, since Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The Court hereby certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals as a poor person is denied. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). Further requests to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis should be directed on motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in accordance with Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 2/11/21. Copy of this NEF and order mailed to pro se petitioner at Auburn.(KAP)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-

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

Search for this case: Turley v. Graham
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Paul S. Turley
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: Harold D. Graham
Represented By:	Alyson Gill, Arlene Roces, Laura Stockmyer (e-service)
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?