Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 3, 2021

Finkelstein v. Claudio

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:18-cv-02570-VSB-OTW
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Finkelstein v. Claudio: Judge Broderick denied Finkelstein’s habeas petition, dismissed the action, and declined to issue an appeal certificate.

Who this affects

Steven Finkelstein, the pro se petitioner, whose petition was denied and action dismissed; Stephen Claudio, the respondent; and the case, which was closed.

What happened

In Finkelstein v. Claudio, Steven Finkelstein asked the federal court for habeas relief. A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition and warned that failing to object could limit later appeal rights.

Finkelstein was given additional time to object, but he did not file objections or ask for another extension. The court reviewed the record and the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Broderick denied the petition in its entirety and dismissed the action. The court also declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Finkelstein had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, and it directed the clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Finkelstein v. Claudio · No. 1:18-cv-02570-VSB-OTW
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Nov. 3, 2021

Background

Steven Finkelstein, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus—a request for court relief under the habeas statute. On May 27, 2021, Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied. The recommendation notified Finkelstein that he had 14 days to object and that failing to object could waive objections and prevent appellate review.

Judge Broderick later extended Finkelstein’s deadline to August 16, 2021. Finkelstein did not file objections and did not request another extension.

Court’s Review

Because no timely objections were filed, the court reviewed the record and the Report and Recommendation for clear error. The court found no clear error and adopted the recommendation for the reasons stated in it. The order itself does not provide additional analysis of the underlying habeas claims.

Ruling

The court denied Finkelstein’s petition in its entirety and dismissed the action. It also held that Finkelstein had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied, so a certificate of appealability—a document required for certain habeas appeals—would not issue. The clerk was directed to mail the order to Finkelstein and close the case.

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.