YOUNG v. FOLINO

Filing 22

ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; PETIITONER'S OBJECTIONS TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ARE OVERRULED; AND THE PETIITON FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DISMISSED. THERE IS NO BASIS IN THE CASE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 12/22/09. 12/24/09 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED AND FAXED.(lvj, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA EDWARD S. YOUNG, Petitioner, v. LOUIS S. FOLINO, et al., Respondents. : : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-2164

ORDER AND NOW, this 22nd day of December 2009, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge L. Felipe Restrepo (doc. no. 16) and Petitioner's objections thereto (doc. no. 20), it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. Petitioner's objections to the Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED; and 3. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, (doc. nos. 1, 3) is DISMISSED.

1

4.

There is no basis in the case for the issuance of a certificate of appealability.1

AND IT IS SO ORDERED. S/Eduardo C. Robreno EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J.

A petitioner seeking a certificate of appealability must demonstrate "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). "A petitioner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that jurists of reason could disagree with the district court's resolution of his constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further." Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003). No basis for a certificate of appealability exists in this case, as Petitioner is unable to meet this standard. 2

1