Alton Davis v. United States
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:14-cv-00186
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Alton Davis v. United States, Judge Hellerstein denied Davis’s request for post-conviction relief under Section 2255 and declined a certificate of appealability.
Alton Davis’s federal post-conviction petition was denied, and the related civil case was dismissed. The United States was the respondent.
What happened
In Alton Davis v. United States, Alton Davis sought relief under Section 2255, a federal procedure for challenging a federal sentence or conviction. The judgment also lists a related criminal case.
The court said the motion and case records showed that Davis was not entitled to relief, so it found that no factual hearing was necessary. The judgment does not describe the specific grounds for Davis’s request or the court’s reasoning beyond that statement.
Judge Hellerstein denied the Section 2255 petition, declined to issue a certificate of appealability, and entered judgment dismissing the civil case.
The detailed version
- Alton Davis v. United States · No. 1:14-cv-00186
- Alvin Hellerstein
- June 10, 2024
Background
Alton Davis filed a petition seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The judgment also lists criminal case number 06 Cr. 911. The judgment refers to the court’s separate June 10, 2024 order but does not include that order’s explanation of the claims or the reasons for seeking relief.
Court’s ruling
The court denied the § 2255 petition. It stated that “the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief,” and therefore ruled that no fact hearing was necessary. The judgment does not identify whether the denial rested on a procedural bar, the merits of a specific claim, or another ground.
The court also declined to issue a Certificate of Appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a federal post-conviction petition. The court cited the lack of a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied and the failure to identify a claim that reasonable judges would debate. Judgment was entered dismissing case 14cv186.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.