SMITH v. DIGUGLIELMO et al

Filing 47

ORDER THAT PETITIONER'S PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2254 AND AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTAL HABEAS CORPUS PETITION ARE DENIED AND DISMISSED AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAN E. DUBOIS ON 4/9/18. 4/11/18 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PETITIONER AND EMAILED TO COUNSEL.(jaa, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RONALD L. SMITH,
Petitioner,

CIVIL ACTION

v.
DAVID DIGUGLIELMO,
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE
COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Respondents.

NO. 06-2918

ORDER
AND NOW, this 9th day of April, 2018, upon consideration of petitioner Ronald L.
Smith’s pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. No. 1, filed on
June 3, 2006), petitioner’s pro se Amended/Supplemental Habeas Corpus Petition (Doc. No. 40,
filed on July 7, 2017), and the Government’s Supplemental Response to the Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus (Doc. No 45, filed on December 11, 2017), for the reasons stated in the
accompanying Memorandum dated April 9, 2018, IT IS ORDERED that pro se petitioner’s
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and Amended/Supplemental Habeas
Corpus Petition are DENIED and DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability will not issue because
reasonable jurists would not debate whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a
constitutional right or 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).
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Hon. Jan E. DuBois
DuBOIS, JAN E., J.