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.

Williams v. Sauers

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

February 25, 2015

JAMAL WILLIAMS, Petitioner,
v.
DEBRA SAUERS, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, Respondents.

ORDER

JAMES KNOLL GARDNER, District Judge.

NOW, this 24th day of February, 2015, upon consideration of the following documents:

(1) Petition Under 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State Custody, which petition was filed by petitioner Jamal Williams pro se on January 9, 2012;[1]
(2) Petitioner's Memorandum of Law in Support of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which memorandum was filed on March 15, 2012;
(3) Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which response was filed on June 6, 2012;
(4) Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Henry S. Perkin dated and filed March 6, 2014; and
(5) Petitioner's Objections to the District Magistrate[]s Report and Recommendation, which objections were filed March 24, 2014; it appearing that petitioner's objections to Magistrate Judge Perkin's Report and Recommendation are a restatement of the issues raised in his underlying petition for habeas corpus relief and are without merit; it further appearing after de novo review of this matter that Magistrate Judge Perkin'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 Perkin's Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's objections to Magistrate Judge Perkin's Report and Recommendation are overruled.[2]

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the within petition for habeas corpus relief filed by petitioner pro se is denied without a hearing.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that because petitioner fails to demonstrate denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability is denied.[3]

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.