Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 22, 2023

Mack v. Collado

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:21-cv-08541
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Mack v. Collado, Judge Karas’s court dismissed Jerome Mack’s habeas petition with prejudice, denied a certificate of appealability, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Jerome Mack’s habeas case was dismissed with prejudice; J. Collado, Superintendent of Shawangunk Correctional Facility, was the named defendant.

What happened

In Mack v. Collado, the court adopted a prior report and recommendation in full. The opinion excerpt does not describe the claims or reasoning addressed in that report.

The court dismissed Jerome Mack’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus with prejudice, meaning the petition could not be brought again in the same form. It also declined to issue a certificate of appealability.

The court further certified that an appeal from the judgment on the merits would not be taken in good faith, and the case was closed. Judge Karas is identified as the judge in the provided case information.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mack v. Collado · No. 7:21-cv-08541
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Sept. 22, 2023

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. It then dismissed Jerome Mack’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus with prejudice. The judgment does not state the underlying habeas claims or explain the Report and Recommendation’s reasoning; those details are in the separate order and report referenced by the judgment.

Appeal-related rulings

The court ruled that Mack had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, so it would not issue a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability is required for an appeal in this type of case.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the judgment on the merits would not be taken in good faith. The judgment states that the case was closed.

Effect

The petition was dismissed with prejudice, and the court did not issue a certificate of appealability. The provided judgment does not independently reveal whether the dismissal rested on the merits or on another ground addressed in the adopted materials.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.