Paradiso v. Kaplan, No. 9:2016cv01458 - Document 36 (N.D.N.Y 2019)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that 31 Report and Recommendation is adopted in whole. ORDERED that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED; and no Certificate of Appealability shall be issued. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 7/3/19. {order served via regular mail on petitioner}(nas)

Download PDF
Paradiso v. Kaplan Doc. 36 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------JESSICA L. PARADISO, Petitioner, -v- 9:16-CV-1458 (DNH/CFH) SABINA KAPLAN, Superintendent, Respondent. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: JESSICA L. PARADISO Petitioner 16-G-0266 Bedford Hills Correctional Facility 247 Harris Road Bedford Hills, NY 10507 HON. LETITIA JAMES Attorney General for the State of New York Attorney for Respondent 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 ALYSON J. GILL, ESQ. LISA E. FLEISCHMANN, ESQ. Ass't Attorneys General DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Petitioner Jessica L. Paradiso brought this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 13, 2019, the Honorable Christian F. Hummel, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that the petition be denied and that no certificate of appealability be issued. Petitioner filed timely objections to the Dockets.Justia.com Report-Recommendation. Respondent submitted a response in opposition to petitioner's objections, and petitioner submitted a reply. 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 2. No Certificate of Appealability shall be issued. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 3, 2019 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.