Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Williams v. Commonwealth

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

August 6, 2019

KENDALL WILLIAMS, Petitioner,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PA, and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondents.

          ORDER

          EDWARD G. SMITH, J.

         AND NOW, this 6th day of August, 2019, after considering the petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed by the pro se petitioner, Kendall Williams (“Williams”) (Doc. No. 1), the state court record (Doc. No. 11), the respondents' response to the habeas petition (Doc. No. 16), Williams's reply to the respondents' response to the habeas petition (Doc. No. 19), Williams's April 19, 2019 letter with attachments (Doc. No. 20), the report and recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (the “R&R”) (Doc. No. 18), Williams's timely objections to the report and recommendation (Doc. No. 21), [1]and Williams's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 22), it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. The clerk of court is DIRECTED to REMOVE this action from civil suspense and RETURN it to the court's active docket;
2. Williams's objections to the report and recommendation (Doc. No. 21) are OVERRULED, except to the extent that Williams requested that the court consider his reply brief (Doc. No. 19) when ruling on his objections and reviewing the R&R;[2]
3. The Honorable Linda K. Caracappa's report and recommendation (Doc. No. 18) is APPROVED and ADOPTED except as otherwise modified in endnote 2 of this order;
4. The petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DISMISSED;
5. The motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 22) is DENIED;[3]
6. The petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and is therefore not entitled to a certificate of appealability, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); and
7. The clerk of court shall mark this case as CLOSED.

---------

Notes:

[1] Because the clerk's office served the R&R on Williams by mail, he was entitled to an additional three days beyond the 14-day period to file objections to the R&R. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) (providing parties with additional three days to act if served by mail under Rule 5(b)(2)(C)). In addition, because the 17th day fell on Sunday, May 5, 2019, Williams had until Monday, May 6, 2019, to file objections to the R&R. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1)(C) (“When the period is stated in days or a longer unit of time: . . . (C) include the last day of the period, but if the last day is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday.”). As Williams included a certificate of service signed and dated on April 29, 2019, the court has used this date as the filing date.

[2] The court conducts a de novo review and determination of the portions of the report and recommendation by the magistrate judge to which there are objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”); see also E.D. Pa. Loc. R. Civ. P. 72.1(IV)(b) (providing requirements for filing objections to magistrate judge's proposed findings, recommendations or report).

By way of background, in September 2005, the Upper Merion Township Police Department charged Williams with numerous offenses, including, among other offenses, Attempted Homicide (18 Pa. C.S. §§ 901(a), 2502), Rape (18 Pa. C.S. § 3121), Aggravated Assault (18 Pa. C.S. § 2702), Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse (18 Pa. C.S. § 3123), Aggravated Indecent Assault (18 Pa. C.S. § 3125) and Possessing an Instrument of Crime (18 Pa. C.S. § 907). See State Ct. R., Doc. No. 11-2, Criminal Complaint. These charges arose from an incident where the police alleged that Williams shot his ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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