CREW v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETIITON FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DISMISSED; PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF OCUNSEL IS DENIED; PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS DENIED; AND A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY IS NOT GRANTED.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 3/14/13. 3/15/13 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(lvj, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
WARRENTON F. CREW,
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
AND NOW, this 14th day of March 2013, upon consideration of the Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1), Respondents’ Response thereto (Doc. No. 7), and careful review of
the Report and Recommendation of Thomas J. Rueter, United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. No.
18),1 it is hereby ORDERED that:
The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED;
Petitioner’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. No. 19) is DENIED;
Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument (Doc. No. 20 ) is DENIED; and
A certificate of appealability is not granted.
BY THE COURT:
S/Legrome D. Davis
Legrome D. Davis, J.
While Petitioner filed a document entitled “Objection and Request” (Doc. No. 20),
Petitioner’s document simply contains a request for oral argument and does not contain any
substantive objections to Judge Rueter’s Report and Recommendation.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?