From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goodwin v. Pallito

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT
Feb 24, 2015
File No. 2:14 CV 110 (D. Vt. Feb. 24, 2015)

Summary

concluding that § 2244(d)(D) would not apply where petitioner "d[id] not assert that he observed the alleged ineffective conduct only recently"

Summary of this case from Rodriguez v. New York

Opinion

File No. 2:14 CV 110

02-24-2015

Leroy Goodwin, Petitioner, v. Andrew Pallito, Commissioner, Vermont Department of Corrections, Respondent.


ORDER

The Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed September 25, 2014. Petitioner's objections were filed February 13, 2015.

A district judge must make a de novo determination of those portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which an objection is made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1); Perez-Rubio v. Wyckoff, 718 F.Supp. 217, 227 (S.D.N.Y. 1989). The district judge may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the magistrate's proposed findings and recommendations." Id.

After careful review of the file, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and the objections, this Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's recommendations in full.

The respondent's motion to dismiss (Doc. 10) is GRANTED as to all of Goodwin's claims except for his claim alleging errors in his PCR case. It is further ordered that under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing §2254 Cases, Goodwin's claim attacking the PCR proceedings is DISMISSED and Goodwin's Petition (Doc. 3) is DISMISSED.

Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 22(b), a certificate of appealability is DENIED because the petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of denial of a federal right. Furthermore, the petitioner's grounds for relief do not present issues which are debatable among jurists of reasons, which could have been resolved differently, or which deserve further proceedings. See e.g., Flieger v. Delo, 16 F.3rd 878, 882-83 (8th Cir.) cert. denied, 513 U.S. 946 (1994); Sawyer v. Collins, 986 F.2d 1493, 1497 (5th cir.), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 933 (1993).

Furthermore, it is certified that any appeal of this matter would not be taken in good faith, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

THIS CASE IS DISMISSED.

Dated at Burlington, in the District of Vermont, this 24th day of February, 2015.

/s/ William K. Sessions III

William K. Sessions III

Judge U.S. District Court


Summaries of

Goodwin v. Pallito

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT
Feb 24, 2015
File No. 2:14 CV 110 (D. Vt. Feb. 24, 2015)

concluding that § 2244(d)(D) would not apply where petitioner "d[id] not assert that he observed the alleged ineffective conduct only recently"

Summary of this case from Rodriguez v. New York

concluding that § 2244(d)(D) would not apply where petitioner "d[id] not assert that he observed the alleged ineffective conduct only recently"

Summary of this case from Banner v. Griffin

concluding that § 2244(d)(D) would not apply where petitioner "d[id] not assert that he observed the alleged ineffective conduct only recently"

Summary of this case from Floyd v. Kirkpatrick

concluding that § 2244(d)(D) would not apply where petitioner "d[id] not assert that he observed the alleged ineffective conduct only recently"

Summary of this case from Granados v. Singas
Case details for

Goodwin v. Pallito

Case Details

Full title:Leroy Goodwin, Petitioner, v. Andrew Pallito, Commissioner, Vermont…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT

Date published: Feb 24, 2015

Citations

File No. 2:14 CV 110 (D. Vt. Feb. 24, 2015)

Citing Cases

Rodriguez v. New York

Failing to assert this argument can alone be grounds to find the exception inapplicable. See, e.g., Goodwin…

Ocasio v. Lee

Kartagener's failure to timely file the notice of appeal (or perfect the appeal thereafter) obviously does…