Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 13, 2024

Goding v. Capra

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:20-cv-06390
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Goding v. Capra, Judge Failla denied the petition, declined to issue an appeal certificate, denied fee-free appeal status, and closed the case.

Who this affects

The ruling denied Emil Goding’s petition, prevented issuance of a certificate of appealability, denied fee-free status for any appeal, and closed the case.

What happened

In Goding v. Capra, the court considered a petition brought by Emil Goding against Michael Capra. The judgment does not describe the petition’s underlying claims or the arguments made by either side.

The court adopted Judge Wang’s report and denied the petition. It also ruled that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue, found that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denied fee-free status for an appeal, and closed the case.

Judge Katherine Failla entered these rulings on August 13, 2024. The provided judgment refers to the court’s separate opinion and order but does not explain the underlying reasoning.

The detailed version

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

Case
Goding v. Capra · No. 1:20-cv-06390
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Aug. 13, 2024

Rulings

The court adopted in full, by reference, Judge Wang’s report and denied the petition. The provided judgment does not identify the petition’s underlying legal claims or explain the reasoning in the report or the court’s separate opinion and order.

The court also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because the petitioner had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. In addition, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court found that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of any appeal. The case was closed.

What the Opinion Does Not Say

The provided judgment does not state whether the petition was resolved on the merits or on a procedural ground. It only adopts the reasoning of materials that are not included in the provided text.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.