Green v. Schneiderman
- 7:15-cv-02825
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Marcus Green v. Letitia James: the court denied Green’s habeas petition, refused an appeal certificate, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Marcus Green’s habeas petition was denied, and he was denied a certificate of appealability and permission to proceed without paying court fees for an appeal. The case was closed.
What happened
In Marcus Green v. Letitia James, Marcus Green asked the federal court for habeas relief, a process for challenging custody through a federal petition. The judgment states that the court adopted a prior recommendation and opinion as its own.
The available judgment does not explain the underlying facts, Green’s specific claims, or the reasoning supporting the denial. It refers to a memorandum opinion and order dated June 21, 2021, and to a recommendation that the court adopted.
The court denied the petition, ruled that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue, and denied Green permission to proceed without paying court fees for an appeal. The case was closed. The opinion does not identify the judge; the judgment was signed by Ruby J. Krajick, Clerk of Court, through a deputy clerk.
The detailed version
- Green v. Schneiderman · No. 7:15-cv-02825
- June 22, 2021
Background
The judgment identifies Marcus Green as the plaintiff and Letitia James as the defendant. It concerns Green’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a petition seeking federal relief concerning custody. The judgment itself does not describe the underlying events, the claims raised, or the relief Green requested.
Court’s ruling
The court stated that, for the reasons given in its June 21, 2021 Memorandum Opinion and Order, it adopted a prior report and recommendation as the court’s opinion. It denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
The court also ruled that Green had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, so a certificate of appealability would not issue. A certificate of appealability is required to pursue an appeal in this type of proceeding. The court further certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying court fees for purposes of an appeal. The case was closed.
Information not provided in the judgment
The supplied text does not identify the judge who issued the June 21 memorandum opinion and order, explain the report and recommendation’s reasoning, or state whether the petition was denied after the court reached the merits or on a threshold ground.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.