Clark v. The State of New York
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:22-cv-06635
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
Clark v. New York: Judge Karas dismissed Clark’s federal petition challenging his continued supervision and treatment.
Eric Wade Clark’s federal petition was dismissed; the order also denied a certificate of appealability and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
What happened
In Clark v. The State of New York, Eric Wade Clark challenged his continued placement under strict and intensive supervision and treatment after earlier civil confinement as a dangerous sex offender. He also challenged related state-court decisions and an earlier federal case concerning parole revocation.
A magistrate judge recommended denying Clark’s petition. Clark did not file objections, and the court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The opinion does not include the recommendation’s detailed reasoning.
Judge Kenneth M. Karas found no error and adopted the recommendation in full. He dismissed the petition, declined to issue a certificate allowing an appeal, and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Clark v. The State of New York · No. 7:22-cv-06635
- Kenneth Karas
- Aug. 30, 2024
Background
In 2016, a New York state court found Eric Wade Clark to be a dangerous sex offender with a mental abnormality and ordered civil confinement. In 2019, another state court ordered his release from confinement to strict and intensive supervision and treatment under New York Mental Hygiene Law § 10.11. Clark later sought discharge from that supervision. After ordering an updated report, the state court denied his discharge petition on October 14, 2021.
Federal petition
Clark, representing himself, filed this federal petition in 2022. The court understood the petition to challenge his continued supervision and treatment, the June 15, 2021 state-court order, the October 14, 2021 denial of discharge, an earlier federal petition concerning the 2007 revocation of his parole, and the state proceedings beginning in 2012.
Recommendation and review
The court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause, who issued a Report and Recommendation on August 5, 2024, recommending that the petition be denied. Clark filed no objections. Judge Karas therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the recommendation. The opinion states that the court found no substantive error, but it does not provide the recommendation’s detailed analysis.
Ruling
Judge Kenneth M. Karas adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety and ordered that the petition be dismissed. The court also ruled that no certificate of appealability would issue because Clark had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. It further certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. The court directed the clerk to terminate the pending motions, close the case, and mail Clark a copy of the order.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.