Thomas v. Crowley, No. 9:2019cv00779 - Document 23 (N.D.N.Y 2023)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER that Magistrate Judge Hummel's Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 22 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety. Petitioner's Petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Dkt. No. 1 ) is DENIED and DISMISSED. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Signed by U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 3/28/2023. (sal)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Thomas v. Crowley Doc. 23 Case 9:19-cv-00779-GTS-CFH Document 23 Filed 03/28/23 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _____________________________________________ DERRICK THOMAS, Petitioner, 9:19-CV-0779 (GTS/CFH) v. KAREN CROWLEY, Respondent. _____________________________________________ APPEARANCES: OFFICE OF NOREEN E. McCARTHY Counsel for Petitioner P.O. Box 756 Keene Valley, New York 12943 NOREEN E. McCARTHY, ESQ. HON. LETITIA A. JAMES Attorney General for the State of New York Counsel for Respondent 28 Liberty Street New York, New York 10005 PRISCILLA I. STEWARD, ESQ. Assistant Attorney General GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Derrick Thomas (“Petitioner”) filed his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on July 1, 2019. (Dkt. No. 1.) By Report-Recommendation dated March 7, 2023, the Honorable Christian F. Hummel, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that the Petition be denied and dismissed, and that no certificate of appealability be issued. (Dkt. No. 22.) Petitioner has not filed an objection to the Report-Recommendation, and the time in which to do so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.) After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Dockets.Justia.com Case 9:19-cv-00779-GTS-CFH Document 23 Filed 03/28/23 Page 2 of 2 Hummel’s thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear-error in the ReportRecommendation.1 Magistrate Judge Hummel employed the proper standards, accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. As a result, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety for the reasons set forth therein, Petitioner’s Petition is denied and dismissed, and no certificate of appealability shall be issued. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Hummel’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 22) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Petitioner’s Petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Dkt. No. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Dated: March 28, 2023 Syracuse, New York 1 When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a magistrate judge’s] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). 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.
