PIRELA v. THE DISTRICT ATTY CO, et al

Filing 69

ORDER AS FOLLOWS: THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. THE SECOND AMENDED PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DENIED. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 5/16/14. 5/16/14 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(fb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
SIMON PIRELA, a/k/a SALVADOR
MORALES,
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 00-5331

Petitioner,
v.
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE
COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al.,
Respondents.
ORDER

AND NOW, this 16th day of May 2014, upon consideration of the Second Amended Petition for
a Writ of Habeas Corpus with accompanying appendices (Doc. No. 36), the Response in
Opposition with accompanying exhibits (Doc. No. 53), Petitioner’s Reply in further support of
the Petition (Doc. No. 57), the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate
Judge Henry S. Perkin (Doc. No. 62), Petitioner’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation
(Doc. No. 67), the pertinent state court record, and in accordance with the Opinion of the Court
issued this day, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 62) is
APPROVED and ADOPTED.

2.

The Second Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 36) is
DENIED.

3.

A certificate of appealability will not be issued because, based on the analysis
contained in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, as approved
and adopted by this Court, and based on the analysis contained in the Opinion of

1

this Court, dated May 16, 2014, a reasonable jurist could not conclude that the
Court is incorrect in denying and dismissing the habeas petition.
4.

The Clerk of Court shall close this case for statistical purposes.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Joel H. Slomsky
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.

2