Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 12, 2024

Hernandez v. McIntosh

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:22-cv-02266
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hernandez v. McIntosh, Judge McMahon denied Hernandez’s habeas petition, dismissed it, and authorized an appeal certificate only on the jury-note issue.

Who this affects

Pedro Hernandez, whose habeas petition was denied and dismissed; Donita McIntosh, whose objections were also denied.

What happened

In Hernandez v. McIntosh, Pedro Hernandez challenged his custody through a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The judgment also addressed objections filed by both Hernandez and Donita McIntosh to a magistrate judge’s report.

After reviewing the objections, the court denied both of them and adopted Magistrate Judge Lehrburger’s report and recommendations. The court denied the habeas petition and dismissed it. The judgment does not state the report’s full reasoning.

Judge Colleen McMahon authorized a certificate of appealability only for the issue described as the “Seibert/inadequate response to the jury note question.” The court declined to issue a certificate for any other ground presented in the petition.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hernandez v. McIntosh · No. 1:22-cv-02266
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
June 12, 2024

Background

Pedro Hernandez was the petitioner, and Donita McIntosh was the respondent. The judgment concerns Hernandez’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus and objections by both parties to a report prepared by Magistrate Judge Lehrburger. The opinion text provided here does not describe the petition’s underlying claims or the report’s detailed reasoning.

Court’s Ruling

The court stated that it conducted a de novo review, meaning an independent review, of the parties’ objections. It denied both Hernandez’s and McIntosh’s objections. The court stated that the magistrate judge’s report contained no facial error in its conclusions and adopted the report and its recommendations as the court’s decision.

The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and dismissed the petition. The judgment does not add a prejudice designation to the dismissal.

Certificate of Appealability

A certificate of appealability is authorization to appeal a habeas ruling on specified issues. The court authorized one limited certificate concerning the “Seibert/inadequate response to the jury note question.” It declined to issue a certificate as to any other ground presented in the petition.

Classification

This is classified as a procedural order because the provided judgment adopts the magistrate judge’s report without explaining or independently deciding the underlying habeas issues. The referenced June 11, 2024 decision and order is not included in the provided text.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.