Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 24, 2025

Miller v. United States

Docket
1:20-cv-04193
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Christopher Miller v. United States, the court denied a certificate of appealability and permission to appeal without paying fees after finding no clear error.

Who this affects

The petitioner in Christopher Miller v. United States and any attempted appeal from the referenced Order.

What happened

Christopher Miller v. United States concerns a judgment referring to a prior court order and a Report and Recommendation. The judgment does not describe the underlying claims or the recommendation’s proposed outcome.

The court reviewed the Report and Recommendation without objections and found no clear error, calling it well-reasoned and supported by the facts and law. It stated that the petitioner had not made the required showing that a constitutional right was denied.

The court denied a certificate of appealability and denied permission to appeal without paying fees, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The individual judge is not named in the opinion text.

The detailed version

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

Case
Miller v. United States · No. 1:20-cv-04193
Date
Nov. 24, 2025

Proceeding and review

The judgment states that the court acted for the reasons given in its November 20, 2025 Order. It also says that the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation and, without objections to guide that review, found no clear error. The judgment describes the Report and Recommendation as well-reasoned and grounded in fact and law.

The opinion text provided does not identify the underlying claims, explain the Report and Recommendation’s proposed disposition, or state the individual judge’s name.

Rulings

The court found that the petitioner had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. Based on that finding, it ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue. A certificate of appealability is authorization required for certain appeals from a constitutional-rights judgment.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied in forma pauperis status, meaning permission to pursue the appeal without paying the usual court fees.

Disposition

The judgment denied a certificate of appealability and denied in forma pauperis status. It did not state that either denial was with or without prejudice.

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.