Brown v. Kopp
- 1:24-cv-08271
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Brown v. Kopp, the court denied and dismissed Brown’s petition and denied his Letter Motion for Oral as moot.
Brown’s petition was denied and dismissed, his Letter Motion for Oral was denied as moot, no certificate of appealability will issue, and the case was closed.
What happened
Brown v. Marlyn Kopp, Superintendent, Sing Sing Correctional Facility concerns a petition filed by Brown against Kopp. The provided judgment does not explain the petition’s subject, the underlying facts, or the parties’ arguments.
The judgment states that, for the reasons in a memorandum opinion and order dated September 16, 2025, Brown’s petition “must be DENIED and is DISMISSED.” It also states that Brown’s Letter Motion for Oral was denied as moot and that a certificate allowing an appeal will not issue.
The court closed the case after finding that Brown had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The provided judgment does not identify the judge.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Kopp · No. 1:24-cv-08271
- Sept. 17, 2025
Background
The judgment identifies Brown as the petitioner and Marlyn Kopp, Superintendent of Sing Sing Correctional Facility, as the respondent. It does not describe the petition’s underlying claim, the relevant facts, or the arguments presented. The judgment refers to a memorandum opinion and order dated September 16, 2025, but that document is not included in the provided text.
Rulings
The court stated that, for the reasons given in the earlier memorandum opinion and order, Brown’s petition “must be DENIED and is DISMISSED.” The court also denied Brown’s “Letter Motion for Oral” as moot; the judgment does not provide the complete description of that motion.
The court further stated that Brown had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. As a result, a certificate of appealability—a document required for certain appeals in these proceedings—will not issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The case was closed.
Classification
This is classified as a procedural order because the provided judgment dismisses the petition but does not itself explain whether the court reached the petition’s underlying legal question. The classification may depend on the missing memorandum opinion and order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.