Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 25, 2021

Camarano v. Griffin

Judge
Information
Docket
1:16-cv-02095
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Camarano v. Griffin, the court denied Camarano’s habeas petition; the judge is not identified.

Who this affects

Robert Camarano’s habeas petition was denied; no certificate of appealability was issued, the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and the case was closed.

What happened

In Camarano v. Griffin, the court denied Robert Camarano’s petition challenging his custody. The judgment states that the reasons were provided in a separate memorandum and order dated March 25, 2021, which is not included here.

The court also declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Camarano had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. It further certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and the case was closed.

The judgment is signed by the court clerk, Ruby J. Krajick; the judge who decided the petition is not identified in the provided text.

The detailed version

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

Case
Camarano v. Griffin · No. 1:16-cv-02095
Judge
Information
Date
Mar. 25, 2021

Ruling

The judgment states that, for the reasons given in the court’s separate memorandum and order dated March 25, 2021, Robert Camarano’s habeas petition was denied. The provided text does not include that memorandum and order, so it does not explain why the petition was denied or whether the court reached the petition’s merits.

Appeal-Related Orders

The court did not issue a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability is required for certain federal habeas appeals, and the judgment says Camarano had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The case was then closed.

Judge Information

The provided judgment identifies Ruby J. Krajick as the clerk of court and identifies a deputy clerk, but it does not identify the judge who issued the underlying memorandum and order.

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.