122 F.3d 1056 (2nd Cir. 1995), 94-2634, Ford v. Hoke
|Citation:||122 F.3d 1056|
|Party Name:||Paul FORD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert HOKE, Superintendent, Eastern Correctional Facility, Respondent-Appellee.|
|Case Date:||September 11, 1995|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA2 s 0.23 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
Present: WINTER, ALTIMARI and McLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judges.
This cause came to be heard on the transcript of record from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and was argued.
ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is now hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is affirmed.
Paul Ford appeals from Judge Weinstein's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He argues on appeal that he did not make a knowing and voluntary waiver of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), that the evidence was not sufficient beyond a reasonable doubt to convict him, and that the prosecutor's summation was so inflammatory as to deprive him of a fair trial. To the extent that Judge Weinstein's opinion does not explicitly discuss Ford's claim that the evidence of intent was insufficient to sustain his conviction for second degree intentional murder under N.Y. Penal Law § 125.25(1), we note without extended discussion that it was. On all other grounds, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its memorandum order and judgment dated October 25, 1994.
N.B. THIS SUMMARY ORDER WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REPORTER AND SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR OTHERWISE RELIED UPON IN THE UNRELATED CASES OF THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT.
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP