Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.MixedFiled May 1, 2023

Waters v. Lilley

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:17-cv-08258
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCriminalCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Waters v. Lilley, Judge Woods denied Keith Waters’s petition challenging his convictions after finding no clear error in the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

Who this affects

Keith Waters’s federal petition challenging his New York state-court convictions was denied; the respondent received judgment, and the case was closed.

What happened

In Waters v. Lilley, Keith Waters asked the federal court to overturn his New York state-court convictions for two counts of first-degree criminal sale of a controlled substance.

A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition. The recommendation concluded that Waters’s public-trial claim and legal-sufficiency claim failed on their merits, while his confrontation and hearsay claim, and his actual-innocence claim, were procedurally barred and also lacked merit. No party filed a timely objection.

Judge Gregory H. Woods reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, and adopted it in full. The court denied the petition, denied Waters permission to appeal without paying the filing fee, denied a certificate of appealability, entered judgment for the respondent, and closed the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Waters v. Lilley · No. 1:17-cv-08258
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
May 1, 2023

Background

Keith Waters filed a federal petition challenging the validity of his New York state-court convictions for two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree. On April 14, 2023, Magistrate Judge Robert Lehrburger issued a report and recommendation advising that the petition be denied.

Claims and Recommendation

The report and recommendation concluded that Waters’s public-trial claim failed on the merits. It concluded that his confrontation-clause and hearsay-evidence claim was procedurally barred and also meritless. It found that his actual-innocence claim was procedurally defaulted and meritless, and that his claim challenging the legal sufficiency of the evidence was meritless.

A party may file specific written objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation within fourteen days. No timely objection was filed here. The district court therefore reviewed the unobjected-to portions for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record.

Ruling

Judge Gregory H. Woods found no clear error and accepted and adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety. The court denied the petition.

The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. It denied a certificate of appealability because Waters had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Waters, enter judgment for the respondent, and close the case.

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.