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.

Volz v. Rozum

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


August 5, 2010

JOHN JOSEPH VOLZ PETITIONER,
v.
GERALD L. ROZUM, 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: Jan E. Dubois, J.

ORDER

AND NOW, this 5th day of August, 2010, upon consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person is State Custody (Document No. 1, filed February 27, 2009); Petitioner's Motion to Proceed Nunc Pro Tunc (filed February 27, 2009);*fn1 Petitioner's Memorandum of Law In Support of His Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Document No. 6, filed June 4, 2009); Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Document No. 12, filed July 28, 2009); and Petitioner's Response and Reply Brief (Document No. 15, filed September 14, 2009), and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge dated January 29, 2010 (Document No. 19), Petitioner's Objections to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Document No. 26, filed March 19, 2010), and the record in this case, for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum dated August 5, 2010,

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge dated January 29, 2010, is APPROVED and ADOPTED, as follows:

a. Those parts of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Strawbridge dated January 29, 2010, relating to Claims One through Five of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody are APPROVED AND ADOPTED; Claims One through Five are DISMISSED AND DENIED; and,

b. That part of the Report and Recommendation dated January 29, 2010, relating to Claim Six, as supplemented in the attached Memorandum, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED; Claim Six is DISMISSED.

2. Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate David R. Strawbridge dated January 29, 2010, relating to Claims One through Six of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody are OVERRULED.

3. Petitioner's Motion to Proceed Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.

4. A certificate of appealability will not issue for the grounds on which the Court denies relief because reasonable jurists would not debate this Court's procedural rulings and because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right as required under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).


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.