Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 2, 2020

Lara v. Lee

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:19-cv-06338
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Lara v. Lee, Judge Torres adopted the recommendation and denied Lara’s petition challenging his custody.

Who this affects

Ramon Lara’s § 2254 petition was denied; William Lee was the respondent. The case was closed.

What happened

Lara v. Lee involved Ramon Lara’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 against William Lee, identified as superintendent of Eastern New York Correctional Facility.

A magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation, and no one objected to it. The court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Analisa Torres adopted the recommendation in full, denied Lara’s petition, and directed the clerk to close the case. The order also directed that a copy be mailed to Lara, who was representing himself.

The detailed version

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

Case
Lara v. Lee · No. 1:19-cv-06338
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
June 2, 2020

Background

Ramon Lara filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 against William Lee, superintendent of Eastern New York Correctional Facility. The opinion does not describe the underlying grounds for Lara’s petition or the merits of his claims.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox issued a report and recommendation. The opinion states that no objections were filed. Judge Torres reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake, and found none.

Ruling

Judge Analisa Torres adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety. The court denied Lara’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The clerk was directed to close the case, and chambers was directed to mail a copy of the order to Lara, who was proceeding without a lawyer.

Disposition

The petition was denied. The opinion does not independently explain the recommendation’s reasoning or address the merits of Lara’s underlying claims.

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.