Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. PODLUCKY, CR 09-278 (see CA 13-1451) (2014)

Court: District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania Number: infdco20141230f87 Visitors: 3
Filed: Dec. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 29, 2014
Summary: ORDER ALAN N. BLOCH, District Judge. AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2014, upon consideration of Petitioner's Motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. No. 64 at CR 09-278; Doc. No. 376 at CR 09-279; Doc. No. 264 at CR 11-37), filed in the above captioned matters on October 6, 2013, and memorandum in support thereof (Doc. No. 70 at CR 09-278; Doc. No. 382 at CR 09-279; Doc. No. 270 at CR 11-37), filed on November 25, 2013,
More

ORDER

ALAN N. BLOCH, District Judge.

AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2014, upon consideration of Petitioner's Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. No. 64 at CR 09-278; Doc. No. 376 at CR 09-279; Doc. No. 264 at CR 11-37), filed in the above captioned matters on October 6, 2013, and memorandum in support thereof (Doc. No. 70 at CR 09-278; Doc. No. 382 at CR 09-279; Doc. No. 270 at CR 11-37), filed on November 25, 2013, and in further consideration of Petitioner's response to the Court's October 9, 2013 Show Cause Order (Doc. No. 69 at CR 09-278; Doc. No. 381 at CR 09-279; Doc. No. 269 at CR 11-37), filed on November 25, 2013, as well as the various responses and replies subsequently filed by Petitioner and the Government (Doc. Nos. 72, 75, 76 and 77 at CR 09-278; Doc. Nos. 386, 390, 392, and 393 at CR 09-279; Doc. Nos. 272, 275, 276, and 277 at CR 11-37),

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion filed herewith, Petitioner's Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody is DISMISSED. Further, this Court will not issue a certificate of appealability in this case because, for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion, Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer