ROBINSON v. COLEMAN, 15-4214. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20151224a91
Visitors: 12
Filed: Dec. 23, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2015
Summary: ORDER JOEL H. SLOMSKY , District Judge . AND NOW , this 23rd day of December 2015, upon careful and independent consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 2), and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (Doc. No. 7), it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (Doc. No. 7) is APPROVED and ADOPTED ; 2. The Petition for a Writ
Summary: ORDER JOEL H. SLOMSKY , District Judge . AND NOW , this 23rd day of December 2015, upon careful and independent consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 2), and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (Doc. No. 7), it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (Doc. No. 7) is APPROVED and ADOPTED ; 2. The Petition for a Writ ..
More
ORDER
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 23rd day of December 2015, upon careful and independent consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 2), and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (Doc. No. 7), it is ORDERED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (Doc. No. 7) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 2) is DENIED;
3. A Certificate of Appealability SHALL NOT issue because, based on the analysis contained in the Chief Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, as approved and adopted by this Court, a reasonable jurist could not conclude that the Court is incorrect in denying and dismissing the Habeas Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000); and
4. The Clerk of Court shall close this case for statistical purposes.
Source: Leagle
