Skip to main content

United States Second Circuit


RUDENKO v. COSTELLO, 99-2242

In these 16 consolidated habeas appeals under 28 U.S.C. section 2254, where the district court orders adopted the reasons stated by the state appellate court in affirming the convictions and the reasons proffered by the state in opposing the petitions, the orders do not contain explanations sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review, and cases must be remanded for further clarification.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 03/20/2002
  • Published 03/20/2002

Judges

  • KEARSE, Circuit Judge., Before:  KEARSE, STRAUB, and SACK, Circuit Judges.

Court

  • United States Second Circuit

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Larry W. Yackle, Boston University School of Law, Boston, Massachusetts (Perry S. Reich, Schapiro & Reich, Lindenhurst, New York, NY, on the brief), for Petitioners-Appellants.

  • For Appellees:
  • Amy Appelbaum, Assistant District Attorney, Kings County, Brooklyn, New York (Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney for Kings County, Leonard Joblove, Victor Barall, Assistant District Attorneys, Brooklyn, New York, Richard A. Brown, District Attorney for Queens County, John M. Castellano, Assistant District Attorney, Kew Gardens, New York, Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General for the State of New York, Valerie Singleton, Assistant Attorney General, New York, New York, on the brief), for Respondents-Appellees.
Copied to clipboard