Dowling v. Lamas, 16-5723. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20190523e33
Visitors: 7
Filed: May 22, 2019
Latest Update: May 22, 2019
Summary: ORDER PETRESE B. TUCKER , District Judge . AND NOW, this ___ 22nd ___ day of May, 2019, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas (Doc. 1), Respondents' Response thereto (Doc. 7), Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells' Report and Recommendation ("Report and Recommendation") (Doc. 9), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DI
Summary: ORDER PETRESE B. TUCKER , District Judge . AND NOW, this ___ 22nd ___ day of May, 2019, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas (Doc. 1), Respondents' Response thereto (Doc. 7), Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells' Report and Recommendation ("Report and Recommendation") (Doc. 9), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DIS..
More
ORDER
PETRESE B. TUCKER, District Judge.
AND NOW, this ___ 22nd ___ day of May, 2019, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas (Doc. 1), Respondents' Response thereto (Doc. 7), Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells' Report and Recommendation ("Report and Recommendation") (Doc. 9), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED and DENIED, without an evidentiary hearing; and
3. Petitioner has neither shown denial of a federal constitutional right, nor established that reasonable jurists would disagree with this court's procedural and substantive disposition of his claims. Consequently, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
