Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 23, 2020

Watkins v. Colvin

Judge
Loretta Preska
Docket
1:16-cv-04055
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Watkins v. Colvin, Judge Preska denied Watkins’s federal petition, denied a certificate of appealability, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Dennis Watkins’s federal petition was denied, his certificate of appealability was denied, and the case was closed; all pending motions were denied as moot.

What happened

In Watkins v. Colvin, Dennis Watkins filed a federal petition under Section 2254. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition. Because neither party objected, the district court reviewed the recommendation and record only for obvious error and found none.

Judge Loretta A. Preska adopted the recommendation, denied Watkins’s petition, and denied a certificate of appealability because he had not shown that a constitutional right was denied. She also directed the clerk to close the case and deny all pending motions as moot.

The detailed version

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

Case
Watkins v. Colvin · No. 1:16-cv-04055
Judge
Loretta Preska
Date
Mar. 23, 2020

Background

Dennis Watkins filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. A habeas petition is a request for federal court relief from allegedly unlawful custody or detention. The order does not describe the specific claims or facts underlying Watkins’s petition.

Report and Recommendation

On August 30, 2019, Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the court deny the petition. The parties had 14 days to object, but neither party filed objections.

When no party objects to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the district court reviews the record for clear error on its face. Judge Preska reviewed the record and the recommendation and found no clear error. She therefore adopted the recommendation in its entirety as the opinion of the court.

Rulings

The court denied Watkins’s habeas petition. It also denied a certificate of appealability after finding that Watkins had not demonstrated a denial of a constitutional right. The clerk was directed to mail Watkins a copy of the order, mark the action closed, and deny all pending motions as moot.

Classification

This is a procedural order under the stated classification rules because the court denied the petition by adopting a recommendation after clear-error review without discussing the underlying merits. The order’s express dispositions were denial of the petition, denial of a certificate of appealability, and denial of all pending motions as moot.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.