Ulbricht v. United States
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:19-cv-07512
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ulbricht v. United States, Judge Schofield denied the petition and declined to issue a certificate allowing an appeal.
Ross William Ulbricht’s petition was denied, judgment was entered for the United States, permission to appeal without prepaying court fees was denied, and the case was closed.
What happened
In Ulbricht v. United States, the court denied Ross William Ulbricht’s petition and entered judgment for the United States. The judgment does not explain the petition’s underlying claims or the reasons for denying it; it refers to a separate opinion and order dated June 13, 2022.
The court also ruled that no certificate of appealability would issue, meaning it would not authorize an appeal under the cited standard. It further denied permission to appeal without prepaying court fees, finding that an appeal from the merits judgment would not be taken in good faith.
Judge Schofield is identified as the judge in the supplied case information. The judgment closed the case.
The detailed version
- Ulbricht v. United States · No. 1:19-cv-07512
- Lorna Schofield
- June 13, 2022
Disposition
The judgment states that, for the reasons given in a separate Opinion and Order dated June 13, 2022, the Petition is DENIED. It enters judgment in favor of the United States and states that the case is closed.
Appeal-related rulings
The court ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because the petitioner had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. A certificate of appealability is a court authorization required for certain appeals from habeas-related judgments.
The court also certified that an appeal from the judgment on the merits would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying court fees. The judgment cites 28 U.S.C. §§ 2253(c)(2) and 1915(a)(3), along with cited appellate decisions.
What the supplied text does not explain
The supplied text is the judgment, not the referenced Opinion and Order. It therefore does not identify the petition’s specific claims, the court’s merits analysis, or the reasons the petition was denied beyond the appeal-related findings stated above.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.