Kravitz v. Rabsatt, No. 9:2012cv00719 - Document 21 (N.D.N.Y 2014)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that the 18 Report-Recommendation is adopted in whole. ORDERED, that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED. ORDERED, that the Clerk is directed to close the file. ORDERED, that because pe titioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of anyconstitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 8/28/14. (served on petitioner by regular and certified mail) (alh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------JAY KRAVITZ, Petitioner, -v- 9:12-CV-719 (DNH/RFT) CALVIN RABSATT, Respondent. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: JAY KRAVITZ Petitioner, Pro Se P.O. Box 206 Earlton, NY 12058 HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General for the State of New York Attorney for Respondent 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 PRISCILLA I. STEWARD, ESQ. Ass't Attorney General DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se petitioner Jay Kravitz brought this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 30, 2014, the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, advised, by Report-Recommendation, that the petition be denied. Petitioner timely filed objections to the Report-Recommendation. Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to which petitioner objected, the Report-Recommendation is adopted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Rule 10, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED; and 2. The Clerk is directed to close the file. Because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of any constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 28, 2014 Utica, New York. -2-
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
