WOODARD v. WETZEL, 02-8543. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20160301c83
Visitors: 9
Filed: Feb. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 29, 2016
Summary: ORDER EDWARD G. SMITH , District Judge . AND NOW, this 29th day of February, 2016, after considering the motion to vacate order denying habeas corpus relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) (the "Motion") filed by the pro se movant, Robert L. Woodard (Doc. No. 34); and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Motion, which is a "second or successive" petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.
Summary: ORDER EDWARD G. SMITH , District Judge . AND NOW, this 29th day of February, 2016, after considering the motion to vacate order denying habeas corpus relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) (the "Motion") filed by the pro se movant, Robert L. Woodard (Doc. No. 34); and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Motion, which is a "second or successive" petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. ..
More
ORDER
EDWARD G. SMITH, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 29th day of February, 2016, after considering the motion to vacate order denying habeas corpus relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) (the "Motion") filed by the pro se movant, Robert L. Woodard (Doc. No. 34); and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. The Motion, which is a "second or successive" petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction;
2. The movant's request for the appointment of counsel is DENIED; and
3. There is no cause for issuance of a certificate of appealability.
Source: Leagle
