Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Colon v. Ericson

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


November 20, 2008

RAUL COLON, PETITIONER
v.
SUPERINTENDENT CHARLES ERICSON, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA RESPONDENTS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: James Knoll Gardner United States District Judge

ORDER

NOW, this 20th day of November, 2008, upon consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed August 30, 2007 by petitioner pro se; upon consideration of the Motion to Appoint Counsel under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3006a(2)(b), which motion was filed June 23, 2008 by petitioner pro se; upon consideration of Respondents' Answer to Petition for Habeas Relief, which response was filed February 8, 2008; upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge L. Felipe Restrepo filed October 16, 2008; it appearing that as of the date of this Order, petitioner has not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Restrepo; it further appearing after review of this matter that Magistrate Judge Restrepo'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 Restrepo's Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied with prejudice and without an evidentiary hearing.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Appoint Counsel under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3006a(2)(b) is denied.*fn1

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 or wrong, and because petitioner fails to demonstrate denial of a constitutional right, there is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability, and therefore a certificate of appealability is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mark this matter closed for statistical purposes.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.