Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 8, 2022

Harrell v. Miller

Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Docket
1:21-cv-06714
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Harrell v. Miller, Judge Hellerstein amended an earlier order and declined to issue Lonnie Harrell a certificate allowing him to appeal.

Who this affects

Lonnie Harrell, whose request for a certificate of appealability was denied; the opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the effect on the defendant.

What happened

Harrell v. Miller is an amended final order in Lonnie Harrell’s case against Miller, Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility. The order added a ruling about whether Harrell should receive a certificate of appealability, which is permission to appeal in this context.

The court ordered that the certificate should not issue. It said Harrell had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been violated.

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein said the amended order corrected his January 13, 2022 order by adding this ruling. The opinion does not describe the underlying case or the January 13 decision.

The detailed version

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

Case
Harrell v. Miller · No. 1:21-cv-06714
Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Date
Feb. 8, 2022

What the Order Addressed

This amended final order concerns whether a certificate of appealability should issue. A certificate of appealability is court authorization required for certain appeals involving a constitutional claim.

Court’s Ruling

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein amended his January 13, 2022 order to add a ruling on the certificate. The court ordered that the certificate should not issue because Lonnie Harrell had failed to make a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been violated. The order cites 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) and Barefoot v. Estelle.

Limits of This Opinion

The provided opinion addresses only the added certificate-of-appealability ruling. It does not state what the January 13 order decided or describe the 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.