BOWERS v. WENEROWICZ et al
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS GRANTED IN PART AS OUTLINED IN THIS ORDER; EXECUTION OF THE PETITION IS STAYED FOR NINETY (90) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO PERMIT COMM OWEALTH TO CMMENCE A NEW TRIAL ON FISRT DEGREE MURDER CHARGE, IF THE NEW TRIAL DOES NOT COMMENCE WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED, THE WRIT SHALL ISSUE AND THE COMMONWEALTH SHALL VACTE BOWERS' CONVICTION ON THE FIRST DEGREE MURDER CHARGE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE BERLE M. SCHILLER ON 7/12/17. 7/12/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (jpd )
Case 2:13-cv-05550-BMS Document 64-1 Filed 09/30116 Page 1of2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MICHAEL WENEROWICZ, et al.
JUL 12 2017
KATE BARKMAN, Clerk
AND NOW, this
, 2016, upon careful and
independent consideration of Malik Bowers' Jetition for writ of habeas corpus and
supporting memorandum oflaw (Doc. Nos. 1and11), the Commonwealth's opposing
brief (Doc. No. 25), Bower's reply brief (Doc. No. 26), the post-hearing briefs of both
Bowers and the Commonwealth (Doc. Nos. 58 and 62), and after review of the Report
and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Richard A. Lloret, IT IS ORDERED
The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is GRANTED in part as to Bowers'
claim that direct appeal counsel was ineffective for failing to raise and litigate the federal
due process issue concerning the jury instructions;
Case 2:13-cv-05550-BMS Document 64-1 Filed U9/;jU/lo 1-1age Lor L
3. Execution of the writ is STAYED for ninety (90) days from the date of this
Order to permit the Commonwealth to commence a new trial on the first degree murder
charge. If Bowers new trial does not commence within the time specified, the writ shall
issue, and the Commonwealth shall vacate Bowers' conviction on the first degree
BY THE COURT:
U.S. District Judge
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?