Kinsman v. Rawson
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:22-cv-03338
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Kinsman v. Rawson, Judge Gardephe denied the request to transfer Kinsman’s petition challenging his conviction to Judge McMahon.
The ruling kept Kinsman’s case before Judge Gardephe rather than transferring it to Judge McMahon; it did not decide the validity of Kinsman’s conviction or petition.
What happened
Kinsman filed a petition challenging his criminal conviction against Rawson, identified as the superintendent of Bare Hill Correctional Facility. The case concerns the same 2019 trial involved in a related petition by Kinsman’s jointly tried codefendant, Maxwell Hare.
Rawson’s representative asked Judge Gardephe to transfer Kinsman’s case to Judge Colleen McMahon, who was handling Hare’s related petition. The request cited the shared trial, overlapping convictions and appeals, and nearly identical legal papers.
Judge Gardephe denied the transfer request. The endorsement does not explain why the application was denied, and it does not rule on whether Kinsman’s conviction or petition is legally valid.
The detailed version
- Kinsman v. Rawson · No. 1:22-cv-03338
- Paul Gardephe
- Sept. 26, 2022
Background
Kinsman filed a petition challenging his criminal conviction against respondent Boyce Rawson, whom the opinion identifies as the superintendent of Bare Hill Correctional Facility. The respondent’s representative stated that Kinsman and his jointly tried codefendant, Maxwell Hare, were convicted of several of the same crimes after the same August 2019 trial in New York County Supreme Court. The representative also stated that the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed both convictions in one consolidated opinion.
Transfer request
The respondent asked that Kinsman’s case be transferred to Judge Colleen McMahon under Southern District of New York Rule 13. The request relied on the related case involving Hare, which had a lower docket number and was assigned to Judge McMahon. The respondent argued that the two cases involved the same trial and underlying gang assault, had substantial factual overlap, and presented the same legal issues. The request also stated that Kinsman and Hare had filed a joint memorandum and that most of Kinsman’s memorandum duplicated Hare’s memorandum.
Ruling
Judge Gardephe denied the application to transfer the case. The opinion does not give a reason for the denial. It addresses only the request for transfer and does not decide the merits of Kinsman’s challenge to his conviction.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.