Goodwin v. Superintendent, Five Points Correctional Facility
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:23-cv-06340
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Goodwin v. Superintendent, Judge Hellerstein set briefing deadlines and required former counsel to submit an affidavit about the petition.
Ken Goodwin, his former attorney Murray Richman, and the People, who were directed to participate in the briefing and affidavit process.
What happened
In Goodwin v. Superintendent, Five Points Correctional Facility, Ken Goodwin filed a petition seeking review of a New York Supreme Court judgment. The opinion does not identify the specific type of petition.
Goodwin’s first claim says his attorney failed to consult him before withdrawing a guilty plea. The court said this claim waived attorney-client privilege and required the attorney, Murray Richman, to submit an affidavit describing what he remembered.
Judge Hellerstein ordered deadlines for Richman’s affidavit, the People’s opposition, and Goodwin’s reply, and stated that briefing would then close. The order did not decide the petition’s underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Goodwin v. Superintendent, Five Points Correctional Facility · No. 1:23-cv-06340
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Oct. 12, 2023
Background
Ken Goodwin filed a petition seeking review of a New York Supreme Court judgment. The opinion states that the petition was filed on July 21, 2023, but does not identify the specific type of petition or describe the state-court judgment further.
Attorney-Client Privilege and Affidavit
Goodwin’s first claim alleges that his attorney failed to consult with him before withdrawing a guilty plea. The court stated that this claim waived attorney-client privilege, meaning that communications relevant to that claim could be examined. The court directed Goodwin’s former attorney, Murray Richman, to file an affidavit describing his recollection of the events discussed in the petition and supporting memorandum. The parties were ordered to notify Richman about the case and the required affidavit.
Scheduling Order
The court set November 6, 2023, as the deadline for Richman’s affidavit; December 11, 2023, for the People to file opposing papers; and January 5, 2024, for Goodwin to file reply papers. The court stated that briefing would then close and that the deadlines were not subject to adjournment.
Disposition
This was an order regulating proceedings and setting a briefing schedule. It did not decide whether Goodwin’s petition or claims should succeed.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.