Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 5, 2024

Perez v. McIntosh

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:21-cv-07339
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Perez v. McIntosh, Judge Rearden adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation, denied Perez’s petition, and ordered the case closed.

Who this affects

Ivan Perez, who sought federal review of his state-court convictions, and Donita McIntosh, the named defendant identified as superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility.

What happened

Ivan Perez, representing himself, asked the federal court to review his state-court convictions for first-degree manslaughter and gang assault. He brought the petition against Donita McIntosh, identified as superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility.

Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein recommended denying the petition. Perez received additional time to object but filed no objections. The district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.

Judge Jennifer H. Rearden found no facial error, adopted the recommendation in full, and denied the petition. The court also declined to issue a certificate allowing an appeal, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, directed the Clerk to dismiss the petition, and closed the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Perez v. McIntosh · No. 1:21-cv-07339
Judge
Rearden
Date
Feb. 5, 2024

Background

Ivan Perez filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 asking the federal court to grant relief from his October 24, 2016 state-court convictions for first-degree manslaughter and gang assault. The opinion identifies Perez as representing himself. Donita McIntosh is identified as superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility.

Report and Recommendation

The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein. On September 14, 2022, he issued a Report and Recommendation advising that the court deny the petition in its entirety. Perez received a sixty-day extension to file objections, with a deadline of December 5, 2022, but filed no objections.

District Court’s Review and Ruling

When a party does not object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation on a dispositive motion, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error. Judge Jennifer H. Rearden stated that the Report was not facially erroneous and adopted it in its entirety. The court therefore denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

The court did not issue a certificate of appealability because Perez had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The Clerk was directed to dismiss the petition, mail Perez a copy of the order, and close the case. The opinion itself does not explain the underlying reasons given in the Report for denying Perez’s claims.

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.