Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 5, 2022

Quizphe v. McGuiness

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:21-cv-01709
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Quizphe v. McGuiness, Judge Karas dismissed Quizphe’s habeas petition as time-barred and adopted the recommended decision.

Who this affects

Fredy Quizphe’s federal challenge to his New York conviction and sentence was dismissed as time-barred; the case was closed, and no certificate of appealability issued.

What happened

Quizphe v. McGuiness concerned Fredy Quizphe’s challenge to his New York conviction and sentence after he pleaded guilty to manslaughter and aggravated vehicular assault. The court had directed him to explain why his federal petition should not be dismissed as filed too late.

A magistrate judge recommended dismissing the petition as time-barred. Quizphe did not object to that recommendation, and the court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.

Judge Karas found no substantive error, adopted the recommendation in its entirety, and dismissed the petition. The court also denied a certificate of appealability and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Quizphe v. McGuiness · No. 7:21-cv-01709
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Oct. 5, 2022

Background

Fredy Quizphe filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction and sentence in New York Supreme Court, Orange County. The opinion states that Quizphe pleaded guilty on April 29, 2013, to first-degree manslaughter and aggravated vehicular assault. The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction, and Quizphe did not seek leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals.

Quizphe later pursued several state-court challenges, including motions to vacate the judgment, a request for a writ of error coram nobis, and a motion to set aside the sentence. He filed the federal petition on February 16, 2021. Judge Stanton had ordered him to show why the petition should not be dismissed as time-barred. Quizphe submitted an affidavit, and the respondent opposed the petition.

Report and Recommendation

On August 22, 2022, Judge Davison issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be dismissed in its entirety as time-barred. The notice accompanying the recommendation explained the deadline for objections and warned that failing to object could waive the right to appeal. Quizphe filed no objections.

Ruling

Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. After reviewing the petition and the recommendation, the court found no substantive error and adopted the recommendation in its entirety.

Judge Karas ordered that the petition be dismissed. The court also ruled that no certificate of appealability would issue because Quizphe had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. In addition, the court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith, directed that a copy of the order be mailed to Quizphe, and ordered the case closed. The dismissal was based on timeliness, so the order did not decide the underlying constitutional claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.