Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 24, 2022

Lewis v. N.Y.S. Department of Correction Community Supervision

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:19-cv-07054
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Lewis v. New York State Department of Corrections & Community Supervision, Judge Halpern denied Lewis’s habeas petition after adopting an unobjected-to recommendation.

Who this affects

Samuel Lewis, Jr., whose federal petition challenging his conviction and sentence was denied; the case was closed.

What happened

Samuel Lewis, Jr. challenged his New York conviction and sentence through a federal petition asking the court to review his imprisonment. The opinion states that he had been convicted of possessing a weapon and sentenced to six years in prison followed by five years of supervision after release.

A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition. The recommendation gave the parties time to object, but the opinion states that more than seventeen days passed after it was mailed to Lewis and that no objections were filed.

Judge Halpern found no clear error in the recommendation, adopted it completely, and denied the petition. The court directed the clerk to mail Lewis a copy of the order and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Lewis v. N.Y.S. Department of Correction Community Supervision · No. 7:19-cv-07054
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
May 24, 2022

Background

On June 4, 2013, a jury in New York State Supreme Court, Orange County, convicted Samuel Lewis, Jr. of one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree under New York Penal Law § 265.03(3). He received a sentence of six years’ incarceration followed by five years of post-release supervision.

On July 26, 2019, Lewis filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, asking the federal court to challenge his conviction and sentence. The matter was initially assigned to Judge Cathy Seibel and referred to Magistrate Judge Paul E. Davison. It was later reassigned to Judge Philip M. Halpern.

Report and Recommendation

On April 25, 2022, Magistrate Judge Davison recommended that the petition be denied. The recommendation stated that the parties had fourteen days to file written objections, or seventeen days if the recommendation was mailed. It also warned that failing to object on time could prevent later appellate review of the resulting order or judgment.

The opinion states that more than seventeen days had passed after the recommendation was mailed to Lewis and that no objections had been filed.

Court’s Ruling

A district court may adopt the portions of a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which no timely objection was made if the record shows no clear error. After reviewing the recommendation, Judge Halpern found no clear error in Magistrate Judge Davison’s analysis and adopted the recommendation in its entirety.

The court therefore denied the petition. It directed the clerk to mail Lewis a copy of the order at the address he had provided and close the case. This order’s text does not explain the underlying reasons for denying the petition because it adopts the magistrate judge’s analysis rather than restating it.

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.