Filed: May 26, 2015
Latest Update: May 26, 2015
Summary: ORDER JAMES KNOLL GARDNER , District Judge . NOW, this 26 th day of May, 2015, upon consideration of the following documents: Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, filed by petitioner pro se on March 19, 2014; Petitioner's Memorandum of Law in Support of Habeas Corpus Petition, which memorandum was filed November 6, 2014; Answer of the District Attorney of Chester County to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which answer was filed by r
Summary: ORDER JAMES KNOLL GARDNER , District Judge . NOW, this 26 th day of May, 2015, upon consideration of the following documents: Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, filed by petitioner pro se on March 19, 2014; Petitioner's Memorandum of Law in Support of Habeas Corpus Petition, which memorandum was filed November 6, 2014; Answer of the District Attorney of Chester County to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which answer was filed by re..
More
ORDER
JAMES KNOLL GARDNER, District Judge.
NOW, this 26th day of May, 2015, upon consideration of the following documents:
Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, filed by petitioner pro se on March 19, 2014;
Petitioner's Memorandum of Law in Support of Habeas Corpus Petition, which memorandum was filed November 6, 2014;
Answer of the District Attorney of Chester County to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which answer was filed by respondents on November 25, 2014, together with Appendixes A-S;
Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Jacob P. Hart dated March 11, 2015 and filed March 12, 2015;
it appearing that no objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Hart;1 it further appearing after review of this matter that Magistrate Judge Hart's Report and Recommendation correctly determined the legal and factual issues presented in the petition for habeas corpus relief,
IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Hart's Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied without an evidentiary hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that because petitioner has not met statutory requirements to have his case heard, and no reasonable jurist could find this procedural ruling debatable, a certificate of appealability is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mark this matter closed for statistical purposes.
FootNotes
1. Petitioner received a Notice accompanying the Report and Recommendation stating that petitioner was required to file any objections to the Report and Recommendation within fourteen days of service of the Notice and filing of the Report and Recommendation pursuant to Rule 72.1(IV)(b) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Report and Recommendation and the Notice were filed on March 12, 2015 and were served by mail and email on March 13, 2015. By my Order signed April 22, 2015 and filed April 23, 2015, I granted petitioner's Motion for a 30-Day Extension of Time to File Objections to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, which motion was filed March 23, 2015. Any objections were required to be filed on or before April 27, 2015.
As of the date of this order, petitioner has not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation.
