Opinions of the United 2003 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 4-22-2003 Flecha v. Shannon Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket 01-2610 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2003 Recommended Citation "Flecha v. Shannon" (2003). 2003 Decisions. Paper 635. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2003/635 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2003 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.  NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No: 01-2610 ____________ CARLOS M. FLECHA, JR., Appellant v. MR. R. SHANNON; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA; THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA __________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Civil Action No. 00-cv-05455) District Judge: Honorable Robert F. Kelly _______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) on March 4, 2003 Before: ROTH, BARRYand FUENTES CIRCUIT JUDGES (Opinion filed: April 21, 2003)  ______________ OPINION ______________ ROTH, Circuit Judge: Carlos Flecha appeals the denial of his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus which was dismissed without an evidentiary hearing in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On June 13, 2000, Flecha filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus relief with the District Court under the docket number 00-2984. On June 29, 2000, the District Court granted Flecha an additional 120 days to re-file his petition. This Order was also docketed under number 00-2984. On October 27, Flecha re-filed his petition with the District Court. However, this petition was docketed under a different number of 00-5455. Therefore, the re-filed petition was improperly dismissed because it was incorrectly docketed. We remand to the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to correctly docket the re-filed petition, filed on October 27, 2000, under docket number 00-2984. 2 TO THE CLERK: Please file the foregoing Opinion. By the Court, /s/ Jane R. Roth Circuit Judge 3