Joyner v. Uhler
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-02874
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Joyner v. Uhler, Judge Cronan declined to issue a certificate of appealability and certified that an appeal would not be in good faith.
Anthony Joyner, whose certificate of appealability was denied and whose potential appeal was certified as not being taken in good faith.
What happened
In Joyner v. Uhler, the court considered whether Anthony Joyner should receive permission to appeal the dismissal of his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court had previously adopted a recommendation and dismissed the petition.
The court said a certificate of appealability requires a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. It found that Joyner had not met that standard and declined to issue the certificate. The court also certified that an appeal from the earlier dismissal would not be taken in good faith.
Judge John P. Cronan issued the order on January 14, 2022. The clerk was directed to mail the order to Joyner, who was representing himself, and record that service on the docket.
The detailed version
- Joyner v. Uhler · No. 1:20-cv-02874
- John Cronan
- Jan. 14, 2022
Background
On December 1, 2021, the Court adopted a report and recommendation by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn and dismissed Anthony Joyner’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The current order addresses the possibility of an appeal from that earlier dismissal.
Certificate of Appealability
A certificate of appealability is required for a petitioner to appeal the denial of a petition under § 2254. The court explained that it may issue one only when the petitioner makes a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The court found that Joyner had not made that showing and declined to issue a certificate of appealability.
Good-Faith Certification and Disposition
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from its prior order dismissing the petition would not be taken in good faith. The clerk was directed to mail a copy of the order to Joyner, who was representing himself, and note service on the docket. This order does not state the grounds for the earlier dismissal of the petition.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.