Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.MixedFiled Sept. 10, 2025

McCallum v. LaManna

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:19-cv-02388
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
HabeasSentencingCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Tyron McCallum v. Superintendent LaManna, Judge Roman dismissed McCallum’s federal challenge because some claims were barred and his sentence was not grossly disproportionate.

Who this affects

The order affects Tyron McCallum’s federal challenge to his New York conviction and detention. It ends this federal proceeding after treating his protective-order claims as procedurally barred and rejecting his sentence challenge.

What happened

Tyron McCallum v. Superintendent LaManna concerned McCallum’s challenge to his New York conviction and detention after he pleaded guilty to reduced charges of first-degree manslaughter and second-degree criminal weapon possession. He argued that a protective order violated his rights and that his sentence was too harsh.

The court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation because neither side objected to it. It agreed that the protective-order claims could not be reviewed in federal court because they were procedurally barred. It also agreed that McCallum’s sentence was not grossly disproportionate and was within the range allowed by state law.

Judge Nelson S. Roman adopted the recommendation in full and deemed the petition dismissed. The Clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
McCallum v. LaManna · No. 7:19-cv-02388
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Sept. 10, 2025

Background

Tyron McCallum, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his detention and criminal conviction in New York State Supreme Court, Westchester County. He had pleaded guilty under an agreement to reduced charges of first-degree manslaughter and second-degree criminal possession of a weapon. The agreed sentences were 24½ years for manslaughter and 3½ years for the weapons charge, to run consecutively, followed by five years of post-release supervision.

The charges concerned McCallum’s involvement in two separate Westchester County incidents: the shooting death of Cleveland Baxter and a shooting incident targeting Nikki Morris.

Claims and Report and Recommendation

McCallum raised three claims. He argued that the trial court’s protective order violated his due-process and confrontation rights, and he challenged his sentence as harsh and excessive. Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik recommended that the petition be denied and the matter dismissed.

More than 14 days passed without either party objecting to the recommendation. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record or legal analysis.

Court’s Analysis

The court found no clear error and agreed with the magistrate judge’s reasoning. The claims concerning the protective order were procedurally barred from federal review. The court also concluded that McCallum’s sentence was not grossly disproportionate to the crime to which he pleaded guilty and was within the sentencing range permitted by New York law.

Disposition

Judge Roman adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The opinion states that the denial and dismissal of McCallum’s petition was warranted, and its conclusion provides that the petition was deemed dismissed. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the action and mail McCallum a copy of the opinion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.