The opinion of the court was delivered by: SYLVIA RAMBO, Senior District Judge
Petitioner, Edgar Martin Hurlburt, Jr., an inmate at the State
Correctional Institution in Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, commenced
this action with a petition for writ of habeas corpus, construed
by this court as a petition for relief under the provisions of
28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner pled guilty to first-degree murder on
February 16, 1994, in Snyder County Court of Common Pleas in
Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, and was sentenced to life imprisonment
Although Petitioner did not file a direct appeal, he filed a
petition for relief under Pennsylvania's Post Conviction Relief
Act ("PCRA") on April 28, 1994. On May 2, 1994, the trial court
appointed PCRA counsel to Petitioner, and the case was
inexplicably dormant for several years, notwithstanding
Petitioner's apparent efforts to keep the case moving. Petitioner commenced the instant action
while his PCRA petition was pending with the state trial court.
By order dated June 20, 2005, this court denied the habeas
petition, without prejudice. The Court concluded that the
petition was a mixed petition, presenting both exhausted and
unexhausted claims, and the court concluded that exhaustion could
be excused for inordinate delay on some, but not all, of the
unexhausted issues. Thereafter, Petitioner filed an appeal (Doc.
48) of this court's order dismissing the habeas petition, to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, as well as
a motion for reconsideration to this court. By order dated
October 25, 2005 (Doc. 54), this court denied Petitioner's motion
Presently before the Court are Petitioner's motion for bail
pending appeal (Doc. 52) and Petitioner's "notice to the court:
and, request for issued relief order" (Doc. 53), which the court
will construe as a motion for default judgment on the bail
motion. For the following reasons, the motions will be denied.
Petitioner requests release on bail pending the outcome of his
appeal. Although the court has authority to grant bail pending
disposition of the habeas petition, such authority is narrow.
U.S. v. Stewart, 127 F. Supp. 2d 670, 671 (2001). Bail pending habeas review will only be granted where Petitioner has raised
substantial constitutional issues with a high probability of
success, and exceptional circumstances necessitate bail to render
the habeas remedy effective. Id. By order dated September 30,
2004, this court denied Petitioner's prior motion for bail
pending outcome of the case. The instant motion does not add any
information to the court's consideration of the issue. Further,
it does not set forth the requisite elements to support
Petitioner's request. Therefore Petitioner's motion will be
Also pending is Petitioner's motion for requested relief, in
which he asks the court to grant his bail motion because
Respondent has not filed a response or brief in opposition. Since
Petitioner's motion for bail will be denied, his request for
default judgment will be dismissed and therefore denied as moot.
An appropriate order will issue. ORDER
In accordance with the foregoing memorandum, IT IS HEREBY
1) Petitioner's motion for bail pending outcome of appeal (Doc.
52) is DENIED.
2) Petitioner's "notice to the court: and, request for issued
relief order" (Doc. 53) is construed as a motion for default on
his bail request, and the motion ...