SILEO v. ROZUM, 12-3803. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20151125g20
Visitors: 8
Filed: Nov. 24, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 24, 2015
Summary: ORDER JOEL H. SLOMSKY , District Judge . AND NOW , this 23rd day of November 2015, upon consideration of the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Memorandum (Doc. No. 1), the Revised Petition with accompanying exhibits (Doc. No. 3), Respondents' Response in Opposition (Doc. No. 16), Petitioner's amendment of his second claim (Doc. No. 17), Petitioner's Reply to the Response (Doc. No. 18), the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 27), Petitioner's Objections to the Rep
Summary: ORDER JOEL H. SLOMSKY , District Judge . AND NOW , this 23rd day of November 2015, upon consideration of the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Memorandum (Doc. No. 1), the Revised Petition with accompanying exhibits (Doc. No. 3), Respondents' Response in Opposition (Doc. No. 16), Petitioner's amendment of his second claim (Doc. No. 17), Petitioner's Reply to the Response (Doc. No. 18), the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 27), Petitioner's Objections to the Repo..
More
ORDER
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 23rd day of November 2015, upon consideration of the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Memorandum (Doc. No. 1), the Revised Petition with accompanying exhibits (Doc. No. 3), Respondents' Response in Opposition (Doc. No. 16), Petitioner's amendment of his second claim (Doc. No. 17), Petitioner's Reply to the Response (Doc. No. 18), the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 27), Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 28), Respondents' Response in Opposition to Petitioner's Objections (Doc. No. 34), the transcript of the hearing held on April 29, 2015 (Doc. No. 39), Respondents' Post-Argument Brief in Opposition to Petitioner's Objections (Doc. No. 42), Petitioner's Reply to Respondents' Post-Argument Brief (Doc. No. 43), and the relevant state court record, and in accordance with the Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Strawbridge (Doc. No. 27) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED;
3. A certificate of appealability will not be issued because, based on the analysis contained in Judge Strawbridge's Report and Recommendation, as approved and adopted by this Court, and based on the analysis contained in the Opinion of the Court, a reasonable jurist could not conclude that the Court is incorrect in denying and dismissing the habeas petition.
4. The Clerk of Court shall close the above-captioned case for statistical purposes.
Source: Leagle
