Amay v. Royce
- Philip Halpern
- 7:19-cv-11329
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Amay v. Royce, Judge Halpern denied Amay’s habeas petition after adopting an unobjected-to report and recommendation.
Paul Amay’s federal challenge to his New York murder conviction was denied, and the case was closed. The opinion does not describe any separate relief affecting Mark Royce.
What happened
Paul Amay challenged his New York murder conviction and 22-years-to-life sentence through a federal petition seeking review of his imprisonment. The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik, who recommended denying the petition.
The report and recommendation allowed the parties time to object, but no objections were filed after it was mailed to Amay. The district court reviewed the report for clear error and found none.
In Amay v. Royce, Judge Philip M. Halpern adopted the report and recommendation in full and denied the petition. The court also declined to issue a certificate of appealability and directed the Clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Amay v. Royce · No. 7:19-cv-11329
- Philip Halpern
- Nov. 19, 2025
Background
Paul Amay pleaded guilty in New York State County Court, Putnam County, and was convicted on August 30, 2011, of second-degree murder under New York Penal Law § 125.25(1). He was sentenced to 22 years to life in prison. In December 2019, he filed this federal petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the conviction.
Report and Recommendation
The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik. On October 10, 2025, she issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied. The report gave the parties 14 days to file objections, or 17 days if the report was mailed. It warned that failing to object on time could prevent later appellate review. More than a month after the report was mailed to Amay, no objections had been filed.
Court’s Analysis
Judge Halpern explained that a district court may adopt the portions of a magistrate judge’s report to which no timely objections are made if the record shows no clear error. After reviewing the report, the court found no clear error in Judge Reznik’s analysis and adopted the report in its entirety. The order does not independently discuss the underlying grounds of Amay’s petition.
Disposition
The Petition was DENIED. The court also ruled that Amay had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, so it did not issue a Certificate of Appealability. The Clerk was directed to mail the order to Amay and close the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.