Opinion
04-CV-416.
November 30, 2007
ORDER
This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Victor E. Bianchini, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 2, 2004, petitioner, who is proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On April 26, 2007, Magistrate Judge Bianchini filed a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed because petitioner is no longer "in custody" on the challenged conviction.
Petitiioner filed objections to the Report and Recommendation on June 1, 2007.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. Upon a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation, and after reviewing the submissions and hearing argument from the parties, the Court adopts the proposed findings of the Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Bianchini's Report and Recommendation, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed.
The Court finds that petitioner has failed to make a substantial show ing of the denial of a constitutional right and therefore denies his motion for a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this judgment w ould not be taken in good faith, and therefore denies leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Further requests to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis must be filed w ith the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in accordance w ith the requirements of Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
SO ORDERED.