Nunez v. Collado
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:18-cv-05627-ER-OTW
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Nunez v. Collado, Judge Ramos adopted the unobjected-to recommendation and denied Nunez’s habeas petition.
The order directly affects Roberto Nunez by denying his habeas petition and closing the case.
What happened
In Nunez v. Collado, Roberto Nunez filed a petition asking the federal court for habeas relief. The court had paused the case while he completed proceedings in state court, and he later filed an amended petition.
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang recommended denying the petition and gave the parties 14 days to object. No one objected or asked for more time.
Judge Edgardo Ramos found no error in the recommendation, adopted it, denied the petition, and directed the Clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Nunez v. Collado · No. 1:18-cv-05627-ER-OTW
- Edgardo Ramos
- June 29, 2023
Background
Roberto Nunez, representing himself, filed a federal habeas petition on June 20, 2018. The court stayed the case while he completed exhaustion of his claims in state court. Nunez later filed an amended petition on February 3, 2021, and Respondent Jaifa Collado filed an opposition.
Report and Recommendation
On June 7, 2023, Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang issued a report and recommendation recommending that the petition be denied. The parties had 14 days to submit written objections. That period expired without an objection from either party, and Nunez did not request more time.
Ruling
The court reviewed the report and recommendation under the standard applicable when no timely objection is filed. Judge Edgardo Ramos found no clear error or other error and adopted Magistrate Judge Wang’s recommendations. The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, directed the Clerk to terminate the petition, and closed the case. This order did not itself discuss the underlying habeas claims.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court adopted the recommendation after a no-objection, clear-error review and did not analyze the underlying habeas claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.