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.

Lloyd v. Kerestes

United States District Court, Third Circuit

December 30, 2013

DARNELL LLOYD, Petitioner,
v.
JOHN KERESTES; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA; and, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent.

ORDER

JAN E. DuBOIS, District Judge.

AND NOW, this 30th day of December, 2013, upon consideration of Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody filed by pro se petitioner, Darnell Lloyd, the record in this case, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter dated November 13, 2013, and Petitioner's Objections to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter dated November 13, 2013, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED;

2. Petitioner's Objections to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED;

3. The Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody filed by pro se petitioner, Darnell Lloyd, is DENIED; and,

4. A certificate of appealability will not issue because reasonable jurists would not debate (a) this Court's decision that the petition does not state a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right, or (b) the propriety of this Court's procedural rulings with respect to petitioner's claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

The decision of the Court is based on the following:

1. Petitioner filed his Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus on June 24, 2013. In the Petition he raised three grounds for relief:

a. The evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions.
b. Trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by not filing a motion to dismiss the charges pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 600 for violation of his speedy trial rights.
c. The sentence was excessive;

2. United States Magistrate Judge Rueter addressed each of the issues to which petitioner objected in his Report and Recommendation; and,

3. Petitioner's Objections are overruled for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation which the Court approves and adopts.


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.