Cisse v. James
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:20-cv-03869
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cisse v. James, Judge Schofield denied Ali Cisse’s habeas petition after adopting a recommendation unchallenged by timely objections.
Ali Cisse, whose petition was denied; the case was closed.
What happened
In Cisse v. James, Ali Cisse filed a petition seeking relief under federal law. The court had referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger, who recommended that the petition be dismissed in full.
Cisse received several extensions to object to that recommendation, but he did not file a timely objection. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation only for a clear error on the face of the record.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield found no clear error, adopted the recommendation, and denied the petition. She directed the clerk to close the case and mail the order to Cisse.
The detailed version
- Cisse v. James · No. 1:20-cv-03869
- Lorna Schofield
- Apr. 12, 2022
Background
Ali Cisse filed a petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on May 19, 2020. The opinion states that he filed the petition without a lawyer. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger.
Report and Recommendation
On July 2, 2021, Magistrate Judge Lehrburger issued a report and recommendation advising that the petition be dismissed in its entirety. Cisse was given extensions to object on July 30, 2021; September 3, 2021; October 29, 2021; and January 12, 2022. No timely objection was filed.
Court’s Review and Ruling
When no timely objection is filed to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court reviews the record for clear error. Judge Lorna G. Schofield found no clear error on the face of the record. The court adopted the report and recommendation and denied the petition. The clerk was directed to close the case and mail Cisse a copy of the order.
The order does not explain the underlying reason the report recommended dismissal, and it does not discuss the merits of Cisse’s claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.