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.

Perez v. Wynder

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


March 31, 2010

FRANCISCO PEREZ, PETITIONER
v.
JAMES T. WYNDER; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA; 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 31st day of March, 2010, upon consideration of the following documents:

(1) Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody filed May 9, 2007 (Document 4) ("Petition")*fn1;

(2) Petitioner, Francisco Perez's, Memorandum of Law in Support of Petitioner's Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to, (28 U.S.C.A. § 2254), which memorandum was filed on July 24, 2006 (Document 1-1);

(3) Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which answer was filed by respondents on December 18, 2007 together with respondents' Memorandum in Support of Commonwealth's Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Document 7);

(4) Petitioner's Response to Commonwealth's Answer and Memorandum to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which traverse was filed on January 7, 2008 (Document 8) ("Traverse");

(5) Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Arnold C. Rapoport filed February 27, 2008 (Document 9) ("R&R");

(6) Objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Arnold C. Rapoport, which objections were filed by petitioner on March 25, 2008 (Document 10) ("Objections");

(7) Response to Petitioner's Objections to Report and Recommendation, which response was filed by respondents on November 19, 2009 (Document 12) ("Response to Objections"); and

(8) Petitioner's Response to Respondent's Response to Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, which response was filed on December 1, 2009 (Document 13) ("Reply"),

IT IS ORDERED that the R&R is approved and adopted.*fn2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's Objections to the R&R are overruled.*fn3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the within Petition is denied without a hearing.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall close this matter 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.