Crampton v. Lilley

- 1 -
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_____________________________________
ADAM C. CRAMPTON,
Petitioner,
-v- 	9:23-CV-226 (AJB/ML)
SUPERINTENDENT LILLEY,
Respondent.
_____________________________________
APPEARANCES: 	OF COUNSEL:
ADAM C. CRAMPTON
Petitioner, Pro Se
17-B-3136
Mid-State Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 2500
Marcy, NY 13403
HON. LETITIA JAMES 	JALINA J. HUDSON, ESQ.
New York State Attorney General
Attorneys for Respondent
28 Liberty Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Hon. Anthony Brindisi, U.S. District Judge:
ORDER ON REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
On February 8, 2023, pro se petitioner Adam C. Crampton (“petitioner”), who was con-
victed of several sex crimes in Broome County, filed this petition for habeas corpus under 28
U.S.C. § 2254 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Dkt. No. 1. After
the matter was sua sponte transferred to this judicial district, Dkt. No. 2, the matter was assigned
to Senior U.S. District Judge Thomas J. McAvoy, who referred the matter to U.S. Magistrate Judge
Miroslav Lovric for review, see Dkt. No. 6. Thereafter, Judge Lovric granted petitioner’s motion
Case 9:23-cv-00226-AJB-ML Document 28 Filed 02/25/26 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP Application”), Dkt. No. 9, and directed respondent,
the Superintendent of the correctional facility in which petitioner is being housed, to answer the
petition and file the relevant state court record, Dkt. No. 10. The petition was fully briefed and
then reassigned to this Court. Dkt. Nos. 20, 21, 22, 24, 25.
On February 5, 2026, Judge Lovric advised by Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) that
the petition be denied and dismissed. 	Dkt. No. 26. 	As Judge Lovric explained, petitioner had
procedurally defaulted his claim but, even on the merits, it did not amount to a valid basis for
federal habeas corpus relief. See id.
Petitioner has not lodged objections, and the time period in which to do so has expired.
See Dkt. No. 26. Upon review for clear error, Judge Lovric’s R&R is accepted and will be adopted.
See F ED. R. C IV. P. 72(b).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. The Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 26) is ACCEPTED;
2. The petition (Dkt. No. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED; and
3. No Certificate of Appealability shall be issued.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate the pending motion, enter a judgment ac-
cordingly, and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 25, 2026
Utica, New York.
Case 9:23-cv-00226-AJB-ML Document 28 Filed 02/25/26 Page 2 of 2