Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 25, 2022

Santiago v. Keyser

Judge
Lewis Liman
Docket
1:19-cv-04020
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Santiago v. Keyser, Judge Liman adopted the recommendation and denied Santiago’s petition after finding no clear error.

Who this affects

Edwin Santiago’s petition was denied, and the case was closed. William F. Keyser was the respondent.

What happened

In Santiago v. Keyser, Magistrate Judge Figueredo recommended denying Edwin Santiago’s petition. The recommendation was issued on May 24, 2022.

The recommendation was mailed to Santiago, but the mailing was returned. After the court obtained Santiago’s last-known contact information, the respondent served the recommendation at Santiago’s current address. Santiago did not file objections before the deadline expired.

Judge Lewis J. Liman reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, adopted it in full, and denied the petition. The clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Santiago v. Keyser · No. 1:19-cv-04020
Judge
Lewis Liman
Date
July 25, 2022

Background

On May 24, 2022, Magistrate Judge Figueredo issued a report and recommendation advising that Edwin Santiago’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus be denied. The recommendation was mailed to Santiago’s recorded address but was returned as undeliverable because he had been paroled or released.

The district court ordered the respondent to provide Santiago’s last-known contact information. After receiving that information, the court directed the respondent to serve the recommendation at Santiago’s current address and file proof of service. The respondent filed an affidavit stating that service had been completed. Santiago did not file objections, and the time for doing so expired.

Court’s review

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), a district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. When a party makes a timely objection, the district court reviews the challenged portions independently. Without an objection, the court reviews the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the result or reasoning.

Decision

Judge Lewis J. Liman reviewed the record and the report and recommendation for clear error and found none. The court adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety and denied Santiago’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The clerk was directed to close the case. The order does not separately analyze the underlying basis for Santiago’s petition.

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.