Ervine v. Smith
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:15-cv-09419
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ervine v. Smith, the court denied Ervine’s habeas petition, declined an appeal certificate, and denied fee-free appeal status; no judge is identified.
Moses Ervine’s habeas petition was denied; the judgment also affects his ability to appeal without a certificate of appealability or fee-free status. The case was closed.
What happened
In Ervine v. Smith, the judgment says the court adopted Magistrate Judge Aaron’s report and the reasons given in an April 12, 2022 Opinion and Order. The provided judgment does not explain the underlying basis for Ervine’s petition.
The court denied Ervine’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. It also ruled that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denied fee-free status for an appeal, and closed the case.
The provided judgment does not identify the judge who entered the ruling. It refers to Magistrate Judge Aaron’s report and was signed by Ruby J. Krajick, Clerk of Court, on April 21, 2022.
The detailed version
- Ervine v. Smith · No. 1:15-cv-09419
- Stewart Aaron
- Apr. 21, 2022
Background
The judgment concerns Moses Ervine’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. It states that the court’s reasons were set out in an Opinion and Order dated April 12, 2022, and that Magistrate Judge Aaron’s report was adopted in its entirety. The provided text does not include that earlier Opinion and Order or the report, so it does not identify the specific arguments or legal basis for the petition.
Rulings
The court denied Ervine’s habeas petition. It also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because Ervine had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. A certificate of appealability is a required authorization for certain federal habeas appeals.
The court further certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The judgment states that the case was consequently closed.
Judge and record limits
The provided judgment does not name the district judge. It refers to Magistrate Judge Aaron without providing a full name and is signed by Ruby J. Krajick as Clerk of Court, dated April 21, 2022.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.